Logs of Talisman Discussions of Bahai Faith 3/96
From nineteen@onramp.netThu Mar 21 10:34:21 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 12:23:10 -0600 (CST)
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: Alma Engels
Cc: Talisman
Subject: Re: Covenantal Issues was Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy
>Richard, I have been thinking about bringing up the question of Covenantal
>appropriateness of any post sent to email lists in general and to Talisman
>in particular for a number of reasons. I realize that the recent letter
>from the Universal House of Justice to David House indicates that this is
>appropriate. So let me raise some questions here which others may care to
>discuss. And let me refresh your minds with what I think is the relevant
>portion of the House's reply to David:
>
>> Thus, if any participant in an email discussion feels that a view put
>>forward appears to contradict or undermine the provisions of the Covenant, he
>>should be free to say so, explaining candidly and courteously why he feels
>>as he does. The person who made the initial statement will then be able to
>>re-evaluate his opinion and, if he still believes it to be valid, he should
be
>>able to explain why it is not contrary to either the letter or the spirit of
>>the Covenant.
Dearest Alma,
I understand your concerns and they are most legitimate. Although one
cannot say that the friends must not "courteously" and indeed "candidly"
discuss their concerns regarding viewpoints that "contradict or undermine
the provisions of the Covenant". It is a lot to take upon one's self to
bring such a thing up in that light, and particularly in public. In
private one might make reasonable inquiries that are couched in the most
courteous and respectful language, however, public accusations would
probably be unwise and unproductive.
It is hard for me to see how "Covenantal appropriateness" or as I think
you are expressing it--a certain mind set that would be considered
*right* while others would be considered wrong or "non-covenental" just
doesn't seem IMHO within the spirit of Baha'u'llah's teachings. All
sinfulness so to speak would have to be considered as "non-covenental"
so it would be judgmental to *generally* express such sentiments of
unconvenentalness towards our fellow Baha'is, although, there will be
times when Baha'is start to break the Covenant in the sense of those who
merit excommunication. I would hate to think that I imputed unjustly
such a thing to a fellow believer.
Richard
Richard C. Logan nineteen@onramp.net
Maintain HomePage "The Baha'is of Lubbock"
http://rampages.onramp.net/~nineteen/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How manifold are the truths which must remain unuttered until the
appointed time is come! Even as it has been said:
"Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can
everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every
timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who
hear it." --Gleanings from the writings of Baha'u'llah
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From belove@sover.netThu Mar 21 10:35:28 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 08:07:42 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy
I also see lots of insecurities in Talisman comments and arguments. Although I see and hear insecurities all over the place. Part of the spiritual path. Part of being a sensitive guy.
I don't think we can wait until we're saints to conduct dialogue.
Probably the biggest danger of the dark parts of our dialogue is that lurkers and participants even more naive than the speakers, might mistake air-time for imprimateur and might also mistake articulateness for spirituality and nobility.
As far as the question of labels goes -- "scholars," vs. "academics," "intellectuals," etc., -- I've always been partial to the designation "professional scholars." I think scholars are like artists, actors, and musicians in that some are fortunate enough, gifted enough, and dedicated enough to get paid to do it. There are professionals, avid amateurs and dabblers in every field, including scholarship.
In general, the pro's do it better, have better training, wider knowledge, higher standards and so on. But often the work of the non-pro's is pretty good and worth attending to. A lot of it depends on the discernment of the buyer. In some fields, I can tell how good someone is, regardless of their credentials. In other areas, I tend to rely on credentials.
I also thing there is a lot of reverse snobbery in the public and there are sections of people who perversely refuse to recognize credentials and training, taking a strange pride in their own discernment.
I notice that in the areas in which I am most filled with love and enthusiasm and have been at it the longest time..-- areas of my mature taste --. take music for instance, I'm pretty broadminded and generous in my tastes. I think I'm also that way in the realm of intellectual issues.
And then there is that area that Paul Simon, in his song, "Maybe I think too much," called, "God Talk." Talisman is an example. I think I'm mature tastes there as well.
Philip
From M@upanet.uleth.caThu Mar 21 10:35:59 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 12:12:58 -0700
From: M
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: maqsud
Dear Sen. Thanks for responding
re: 'specific matters'
> Such exhortations to union and concord as are inscribed
> in the Books of the Prophets by the Pen of the Most High
> bear reference unto specific matters; not a union that would
> lead to disunity or a concord which would create discord.
> This is the station where measures are set unto everything, a
> station where every deserving soul shall be given his due.
> Well is it with them that appreciate the meaning and grasp
> the intent of these words, and woe betide the heedless.
You wrote . . .
"I don't see anything here that would warrant a reading in terms of
successively *higher* levels of unity".
My reading, as well as my thinking, is generally rather centrifugal and
scattered. I thought the term "specific matters" implied the same thing as
"collective center" which of course could be anything, or any "specific
matter" that is conducive to unity and concord at any level. The rite of
circumcision, holy communion, the love of coffee or a fear of aliens, are
all "specific matters" which are, to some degree or another, conducive to
unity and concord within a group, but which can ultimately lead to disunity
and discord if they are imposed universally.
" On the contrary, the implication is that the exhortations to
unity of the past, which referred to specific matters, have been
indiscriminately applied, either in areas in which union is not
appropriate," or to an extent which exceeds the original intention,
with the result that measures have been exceeded and deserving
souls not given their due."
What's "contrary"? We're in complete agreement. The indiscriminant
application of, and insistence upon the infallibility and irrevocability of
those exhortations to unity and concord, uttered by the prophets of the
past, which refered to specific, limited matters, have now become the cause
of disunity and discord; disunity among diverse unities. The Revelation of
Baha'u'llah provides a transcendent collective center. It embraces all
"specific matters" and unifies a diversity of unities.
I'm inclined to dissagree with your wording that "union is not
appropriate" in certain areas. I don't believe that such union can "exceed
the original intention" without becoming disunion". My understanding is
that initial means of attaining union becomes inappropriate.
"Union and concord are good in specific matters and within certain
measures, is the implication."
I would phrase it "Union and concord" are essential in all matters but only
attainable to a certain measure within "specific matters".
"I *think* this is talking about attempts to create a monolithic
society in imitation of the one God - to turn the 'many' back
into the One - which means that differentiations which are
intended and which reflect differences between the names of
God are obscured and deserving souls, who represent distinct
names (Kingship, eg, or ulama/ilm) are not given their due."
I agree. And is not this what the teachings on unity in diversity are
intended to safeguard against. Against "social levelling". I think that
this is one of the greatest challenges facing our Baha'i communities.
I have met some Baha'is, for example, who have insisted that
Baha'u'llah claimed diversity of language will not exist in the future.
That there'll be a "universal language" not just an "auxillary universal
language". Language of course is a "specific matter" a "collective center",
one of the primary means of "unity and concord", the backbone of any cuture.
To suggest that an auxillary universal language will render all other
languages obsolete is a perfect example of taking an exhortation intended
to promote union and concord and relating to a specific matter and making it
a cause of disunity and discord.
Forgive me for going on and on but I find the following passage
rather interesting, and related to this discussion. It's from "Disturbing
The Universe" by Freeman Dyson, Chapter 20 (Clades and Clones)
" It is true that a world with a universal common language would be
simpler for bureaucrats an administrators to manage. But there is strong
evidence , in our own history and in pre-history as well as in the history
of contemporary primitive societies, to support the hypothesis that
plasticity and diversity of languages played an essential role in human
evolution. It is not just an inconvenient historical accident that we have
a variety of languages. It was nature's way to make it possible for us to
evolve repidly. Rapid evolution of human capacities demanded that social
and biological progress go hand in hand. Biological progress came from
random genetic fluctuations that could be significant only in small and
genetically isolated communities. To keep a small community genetically
isolated and to enable it to evolve new social institutions, it was vitally
important that the members of the community could be quickly separated from
their neighbors by barriers of language. So our emergence as an intelligent
species may have depended crucially on the fact that we have this
astonishing ability to switch from proto-Indo-European to Hittite to Hebrew
to Latin to English and back to Hebrew within a few generations. It is
likely that in the future our survival and out further development will
depend in an equally crucial way on the maintenance of cultural and
biological diversity. In the future as in the past, we shall be healthier if
we speak many languages and are quick to invent new ones as opportunities
for cultural differentiation arise. . . .
"Diversity on the social level means preserving a multiplicity of languages
and cultures and allowing room for the growth of new ones, in the face of
the homogenizing influences of modern communications and mass media."
"When life invades a new habitat she never moves with a single species. She
comes with a variety of species, and as soon as she is establisned, her
species spread and diversity still further" Freeman Dyson "Disturbing the
Universe"
To me, all this means that true "unity and concord" cannot be
established unless and untill we not only acknowledged the need for, but
regard as essential to our very survival, the preservation and protection of
diversity in all it's manifestations.
With Regard to your other posting . . .
"Of possible relevance to the various kinds of learned in the lawh-i-Maqsud:
from the commentary on the surah of the sun
O questioner, know thou that the people pride themselves upon
knowledge, and praise it, whereas this Servant complaineth of it. For
without it Baha would not have been imprisoned in Akka with extreme
abasement, nor would He have drunk from the cup of woes proffered
by His enemies. Eloquence hath banished Me, and the science of
rhetoric brought Me low.
Thank you - I love this. Could you please, or could someone, E-mail me the
full text.
Appreciatively
Gord.
From nightbrd@humboldt1.comThu Mar 21 10:36:25 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 11:09:43 -0800
From: Doug Myers
To: Talisman@indiana.edu, Sadra
Subject: Re: Insecure Scholars?
Dear Nima,
You wrote:
> They have yet to produce one shred of
>evidence from primary texts that what these "scholars" are saying is
>foundationally wrong or "Covenantly suspect."
>
>Regards,
>Nima
>
>**************************************************************
>* Paradox is a characteristic of truth. What communis opinio *
>* has of truth is surely no more than an elementary deposit *
>* of generalizing partial understanding, related to truth *
>* even as sulphurous fumes are to lightning. *
>* *
>* --From the correspondence of Count Paul von Wartenburg *
>* and Wilhelm Dilthey *
>**************************************************************
My question is this dear friend[if I may call you that as I feel I know a
little about you from your postings on Talisman], what is your definition of
primary texts in this case?
Because of Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Ahd & Kitab-i-Aqdas and 'Abdu'l-Baha's Will
and Testament I included the Guardian and the House of Justice in the term
primary texts.
I would appreciate hearing your views.
Doug Myers
nightbrd@humboldt1.com
"Nothing survives but the way we live our lives." JB
Doug Myers
nightbrd@humboldt1.com
"Nothing survives but the way we live our lives." JB
From lua@sover.netThu Mar 21 10:37:25 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 14:20:34 -0500
From: LuAnne Hightower
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
On 3/18/96 Mark Foster wrote:
>One of my concerns about certain postings on Talisman is that they seem to
>identify "intellectuals" with those sharing a particular mind set or world
>view. It has often appeared to me as though there is a litmus test on this
>list for being an intellectual. One must first accept a particular set of
>_critical_ assumptions. If one does not, one falls (or, sometimes, is
>condemned) into the other camp, i.e., the anti-intellectuals. This sort of
>divisiveness, which is repeated over and over again, sometimes using
>different labels, appears to me to be entirely inconsistent with the
>principle of unity in diversity.
I find this point of view to be absurd. Is this statement itself not
entirely inconsistent with the principle of unity in diversity?
I have never experienced this 'litmus test' mentality from anyone on
Talisman, have found nothing but encouragement when I have ventured to state
my disagreement with a particular attitude or point of view, have received
personal posts from those who even disagree with my particular approach that
are more than cordial and almost always instructive about certain
weaknesses in my reasoning. Although my undergraduate work (I don't EVEN
have an MA or a PhD, but Mom and Pop love me anyway) centered on the history
of ideas, I do not consider myself a "scholar" or label myself an
"intellectual." More often than not my particular struggle has been focused
on approaching these matters of the Faith (even the historical stuff)
equally from the heart and the mind. As a result, my postings are largely
more emotional in tone than most. Yet despite my initial trepidation about
speaking from that deepest part of myself for fear of being labelled "I
don't even know what" by the professional scholars on the list, I have taken
the plunge on several occasions and have NEVER received any attacks on or
criticism about what I have posted from these individuals. I have received
nothing but kindness, encouragement, and open handedness from these
"scholars" you insist on slandering. If they so avidly adhere to this
'particular mind set or wold view,' then how comes it that they are so
capable of disagreeing and arguing with each other, as well as, at times
even correcting each other/accepting correction from each other about
certain claims advanced or statements made about various writings or the
translations/personal interpretations thereof? It is my observation that if
I come into a discussion with a particular attitude or agenda, then anything
that is said can be interpreted to reinforce that attitude or agenda. On
the other hand, if I come with an open mind, free of expectation and
judgment, then I am free to take what is said and sift through it, meditate
on it, keep what is useful, and discard the rest (perhaps after double
checking to make sure it is, in fact, not useful). I wonder what it is
(really) that evokes such outrage. I find "them" rather nice folk. I feel
welcomed and accepted and enriched by this very diverse cyber-clan, and very
puzzled by the divisive statements bandied about by those who hold these
anti-something (I'm not even sure what) points of view. It brings me sadness.
Grateful to be with you all,
LuAnne
From burlb@bmi.netThu Mar 21 10:38:18 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 13:30 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: DEREK COCKSHUT
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: Insecure Scholars?
>I believe you are both refering to our dear friend Juan Cole.I do not
>think for one moment anybody on this particular thread was considoring
>him.
Of course not. They were all talking about *me* because I was out of the
room. They *always* do that! You think I don't know what goes on around
here when I turn my back to actually *do* something with my life? I have
started dreaming in E-Mail, and some of the messages have been shocking!
So, go ahead and pick on me all you want, and I don't care *how* you pick on
me, I only demand (respectfully) for you to tell me *why* you pick on me,
*why* you doubt the authenticiy of my title "Dr." *why* you think I am
paranoid, defensive, and imagaine eveyone is either plotting against me or
ignoring me. Well, I happen to have a list of names here in my briefcase of
people who I heard from someone who knows these things once voted for
themselves in LSA elections when they knew they were not the most qualified
to serve. You all better be nice to me from now on or I will cause so much
trouble for myself that you will never hear the end of it!
When Dr. Jack McCants of the NSA gets here on April 12th you better believe
that we are gonna have a big long talk about what's *really* going on in the
American Baha'i Community.
Dr. Burl
PS: You are all honestly invited to come to Walla Walla for our big event on
April 13th featuring Dr.McCants, catered dinner, entertainment, and much
frivolity. Pay your own way, no hospitality provided. For more info, just ask.
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From mfoster@qni.comThu Mar 21 10:38:42 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 16:12:41 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: LuAnne Hightower , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
At 02:20 PM 3/20/96 -0500, LuAnne Hightower wrote:
>I find this point of view to be absurd. Is this statement itself not
>entirely inconsistent with the principle of unity in diversity?
>
>I have never experienced this 'litmus test' mentality from anyone on
>Talisman, have found nothing but encouragement when I have ventured to state
>my disagreement with a particular attitude or point of view, have received
>personal posts from those who even disagree with my particular approach that
>are more than cordial and almost always instructive about certain
>weaknesses in my reasoning.
LuAnne -
Thanks for your note. While I agree that some people have not been subjected
to harsh verbal assault from other Talismanians, that has not been the case
with everyone. I have myself been referred to as a fundamentalist, a
premodernist, a fascist, and other labels on Talisman, and I have seen the
same, or worse, happen to others.
To the Light, Mark (Foster)
From sadra@rt66.comThu Mar 21 10:40:12 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 15:27:52 -0700 (MST)
From: Sadra
To: Doug Myers
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: primary sources
>
> My question is this dear friend[if I may call you that as I feel I know a
> little about you from your postings on Talisman], what is your definition of
> primary texts in this case?
>
> Because of Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Ahd & Kitab-i-Aqdas and 'Abdu'l-Baha's Will
> and Testament I included the Guardian and the House of Justice in the term
> primary texts.
>
Dear Doug--
Since the Bab, Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha are the Three Central Figures
of the Baha'i Faith respectively, therefore Their Writings (and
especially those of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha) constitute the primary
texts of this Faith. While Shoghi Effendi was the head of the Faith, and is
the Guardian, and the House its current head, nevertheless since neither
one was/is recipient of Divine Inspiration (in the sense of
'wahy' or 'revelation') nor the Centre of the Covenant, which is the sole
function of the Master, or in any way, shape or manner of equal rank to the
Manifestation & His immediate Successor, hence their corpus cannot be, IMO,
considered primary in the way that that of the Central Figures is but should
be, rather, looked upon as secondary albeit complimentary. Sen, Juan,
Ahang or John can correct me if I'm wrong, though.
Happy-Naw Ruz to one and all!
regards, Nima
**************************************************************
* Paradox is a characteristic of truth. What communis opinio *
* has of truth is surely no more than an elementary deposit *
* of generalizing partial understanding, related to truth *
* even as sulphurous fumes are to lightning. *
* *
* --From the correspondence of Count Paul von Wartenburg *
* and Wilhelm Dilthey *
**************************************************************
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Mar 21 10:41:31 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 15:26:54 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Fwd: Re: Fwd: RE: Insecure Scholars?
k
>I believe you are both refering to our dear friend Juan Cole.I do not
>think for one moment anybody on this particular thread was considoring
>him.
Of course not. They were all talking about *me* because I was out of
the
room. They *always* do that! You think I don't know what goes on
around
here when I turn my back to actually *do* something with my life? I
have
started dreaming in E-Mail, and some of the messages have been
shocking!
So, go ahead and pick on me all you want, and I don't care *how* you
pick on
me, I only demand (respectfully) for you to tell me *why* you pick on
me,
*why* you doubt the authenticiy of my title "Dr." *why* you think I am
paranoid, defensive, and imagaine eveyone is either plotting against me
or
ignoring me. Well, I happen to have a list of names here in my
briefcase of
people who I heard from someone who knows these things once voted for
themselves in LSA elections when they knew they were not the most
qualified
to serve. You all better be nice to me from now on or I will cause so
much
trouble for myself that you will never hear the end of it!
My dear Dr.Burl
I am so glad you have come out of the closet and exposed all these
people who are always talking about you behind your back.I think the
worst is when they use as yet unrevealed and only translated into
Islandaco tablets to mock us all.But where I ask you is the respect.You
and I have only ask for a little money to go to Patagonia.As the
Satirists of the Baha'i Community especially Talisman, have we received
respect never.They laugh with our work but always refuse to pay.The
countless number of cancelled articles and speeches, the shunning do we
complain no we percy on.Percy keeps on with Dean and you and I are
never seen.
We should form our own list separate from our top secret one that
nobody can join to one even more secret that even we can not join.This
will stop the spying, those long nights of interrogation we keep having
to undergo, all because the Lady loved Milk Tray.
Thank -you for your bravery in coming forward enjoy searching under the
beds I am sure thats where they are hiding.
Yours in perfect sanity
with the ironing board inbeded in his head>
DR.Uncle Derek
When Dr. Jack McCants of the NSA gets here on April 12th you better
believe
that we are gonna have a big long talk about what's *really* going on
in the
American Baha'i Community.
Dr. Burl
PS: You are all honestly invited to come to Walla Walla for our big
event on
April 13th featuring Dr.McCants, catered dinner, entertainment, and
much
frivolity. Pay your own way, no hospitality provided. For more info,
just ask.
*********
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:41:48 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 18:34:45 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: a bunch of thanks
I would like to thank Derek for explaining to me that I should spread the
marmalade on toast and not on JOhn's toes. I admit I'm relieved. What a
mess! Also, thanks Derek for explaining that I am not expected to write
permission letters for Mark, though I don't understand why not. I have a
great deal of experience with such having raised a couple of boys who
always need special permission for one thing or another.
I want to thank Burl for warning me that he reads his postings even when
he is out of the room. He spared me the embarassment of posting
something truly outrageous about him. Whew!
And, I want to thank David for posting all those letters and e-mail
exchanges. As Alma suggested, now we have the REST of the story. Linda
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 10:42:06 1996
Date: 20 Mar 96 18:32:38 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: TALISMAN-LIST
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
Peter Conn ,
Cheshmak A Farhoumand ,
Ronald GLOSSOP , Vonda McCrae ,
Cynthia McDaniel , "I. Olson"
Subject: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Dear Friends,
I am a new reader on Talisman. The Israeli newspaper article just posted
in Talisman in which reference is made to the inconsistency of supporting gender
equality and not having women on the Universal House of Justice is obviously
going to come up many times, and it brings to mind my own thoughts on this
issue. I know that a lot of discussion has flowed over this issue in the past,
so my questions are: (1) is there an archive of this discussion? (2) if not,
can someone summarize the best thinking we currently have on this topic?
In my own mind, the male gender of the Universal House of Justice is
simply a symbol of Baha'u'llah Himself, Who happened to be male, and has nothing
to do with any inherent capacities of one gender versus another. Similarly the
number of people on the House of Justice is 9, which is, again, as the number of
Baha, a symbol for Baha'u'llah. The actual number of people on the body, as
Abdu'l-Baha says somewhere, could be more than this -- it doesn't really matter.
If this is the general consensus about this issue, I wonder why the
person at the World Center who was interviewed by the journalist simply didn't
say so, instead of talking about it in terms of "divine wisdom" and
"exceptions".
Sincere best wishes to all!
John Dale
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 10:42:21 1996
Date: 20 Mar 96 18:31:53 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: "Don R. Calkins"
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
MYSTIC-L ,
TALISMAN-LIST
Subject: Re: JUSTICE
Dear Don,
If it is true that Justice is an attribute of God, then it is interesting
to think how it might be a _functional_ attribute.
Function occurs when there is more than just oneness. Perhaps justice
therefore relates to the primal process of manifestation.
This gets me back to the Christian notion (not just Christian, of course)
of the tri-unity of the Godhead. Did Christianity ever link this mystical
tri-unity with the concept of justice, of cosmic balancing and adjustment
between positive and negative through the reconciling?
In the work of John Godolphin Bennett (see his four volumes of "The
Dramatic Universe"), this tri-unity aspect of Will as manifestation is developed
along systematic lines in a very interesting mathematical way which shows how
this triadic process of manifestation generates increasingly interlinked
"worlds" of will which correspond to the traditional notion of the Chain of
Being or levels of emanation. His student Tony Blake has carried this even
further in recent publications to include more detailed reference to the Hindu
concept of the threefold process of the gunas.
If you (or anyone) are interested in looking at this in depth, please let
me know.
Sincerely,
John Dale
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 10:42:48 1996
Date: 20 Mar 96 18:32:44 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: "Mark A. Foster"
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
"I. Olson" , TALISMAN-LIST ,
Yael Wurmfeld
Subject: "Old World Order"
Dear Mark,
You wrote today in another posting: "However, we are all in the same
boat. We are living in this moral world, with all its limitations of perception,
trying to reflect the "divinity of God" in our human realities. To me, though,
the key to happiness and freedom from pain is to turn away from worldly
ideologies - and not to try and emulate them or to take one side or the other in
the great culture war which has been sweeping the planet. We can certainly adopt
what is useful, and what we use will differ depending on our understandings of
their [you mean "our"?]Teachings and how they should be applied. But we can
leave the rest. We have the new paradigm for a global society and don't need to
rely on the viewpoints of the old order."
I agree that we Baha'is have been given _some_ of the new paradigms for a
global society. Examples are the explicit notion of progressive revelation; the
emphasis on gender and race equality; the process of consultation; and a
_beginning_ design of some institutions through which humanity may begin to
achieve what could be called global self-government guided by God, or what
previous traditions have called the Kingdom of God on Earth, in which global, or
even "cosmic" values are dominant.
But I'm sure you will agree that we should be very much on guard against
an attitude that says that we Baha'is have been given _all_ the paradigms and
that all truth somehow resides only within the Baha'i community or within a
revealed text and nowhere else. Furthermore, we cannot simply "leave the rest"
-- I often wish we could! -- because the "rest" is precisely what still has to
undergo a living transformation into more and more radiant ("baha'i")
self-consciousness and self-expression.
The whole notion, in my mind, of a science of reality, taken from the
side of human epistemology, is one of a progressive refinement of hypotheses,
eliminating the ones we can definitely disprove and cooperating with one another
to try to gain facts and to perform experiments that will, as rapidly as
possible, enlarge the Realm of the Disproved and take us forward to the Realm of
the Not-Yet-Disproved. In other words, truth, for us, is the
"not-yet-disproved." It is always provisional and relative to what we have
actually _done_ to act on it and test it out.
It is precisely because human beings have begun to take scientific
methods earnestly in some areas that we have seen several paradigms or
development which have come to light ("been revealed") through science in the
last 150 years which are not even spoken of in the Baha'i Writings or at best
very briefly as far as I know. (Of course with so much still untranslated, one
cannot say for sure.) The enormous role of chance and "chaos" in the world is an
example. Chance seems now to stretch all the way from the quantum equation of
the tiniest part to the quantum state of the whole Creation. A lot off work is
still needed, I think, to integrate this "chance" dimension of reality into a
natural theology. Another example is the power that genetic engineering and
nanotechnolgy will bestow upon people to literally redesign their own bodies,
possibly their own minds and emotions -- literally who and what they are and how
long they will live. A third is the genuine possibility of contact with
extra-terrestrial intelligence.
These are far from insignificant developments. In fact, they are
developments of absolutely staggering importance, and yet it is clear that we
cannot find much explicit material about them in the Writings as so far
translated, and that we therefore cannot make fully intelligent judgments about
them based on the "glimmer" of Truth that Baha'u'llah says that God has revealed
through Him to humanity. That "glimmer" was always meant to be expanded into a
steady gleam, a shining light, and then a Sun (the "Daystar of Truth") through
the cooperative efforts of billions of intelligent beings, who otherwise would
be deprived of a meaningful intellectual role in Creation.
I see Baha'u'llah's revelation as a genetic code for S/self-evolution, a
spiritual DNA molecule that will lead us unto "all truth" just like a seed leads
to a great tree. Wherever we happen to be, in terms of our knowledge and
understanding, is simply a soil for that seed to be constantly planted in.
In this light I really honestly don't know what you mean, exactly, by the
term "worldly ideologies," since the Baha'i "ideology" is (or should be) just as
world-embracing in its own spiritually comprehensive way as Marxism tried to be
on its own terms or as any genuine scientific approach to Creation should be. Is
environmentalism, for example, a "worldly" ideology? Is feminism a "worldly"
ideology? Is economics a "worldly" ideology? The essence of the error that we
attempt to point to through this word seems to be notion of an "exclusive" focus
on finite realities while ignoring the totality in which those realities are
set. Although we can subsume the experience we have on this planetary surface of
the Earth into fuller experiences available in larger, more detached settings, I
worry when we set about simply leaving them behind or denigrating them in some
way that does not really seem to be called for.
The so-called Old World Order -- whatever this may actually refer to --
must have a certain level of positivity, a certain "place" in the spectrum of
possible worlds, or it would not exist at all, and instead of simply making
rejective comparisons, we may ask of any aspect of the OWO, "Have the people
involved in this aspect yet seen that aspect in light of principles X, Y, and Z
or facts a, b, and c?" If not, let us Baha'is devise ways to dialogue with them
and help them look at it in those lights and to help them, if they wish, to move
towards a closer approximation of something which their own intelligence tells
them is more desirable.
Again, in Karl Popper's viewpoint, which I have adopted until I find a
better one, one humbly accepts all propositions from whatever source, and one
asks whether particular propositions have been definitely shown to be false. If
they have been, we can know where the truth does _not_ reside. In this way we
avoid the pitfall of dogmatism about where it does reside and over "revealed"
versus other kinds of truths, and we don't have to feel any need to go around
saying in effect "we have the' paradigm (and you non-Baha'is don't)".
This dyad-dominated viewpoint on ownership of truth is not simply
repugnant to the public we seek to reach but also represents extremely poor and
unsynergistic methodology because it precisely in inviting and turning the
energies of the world into justly and scientifically disproving Baha'i
propositions that the light of the non-disprovability residing (if it does) in
those propositions will begin to break through the clouds and penetrate down to
the earth of global public acceptance.
And in the process we all will learn new things.
Best wishes as always!
John Dale
From PXQ00435@niftyserve.or.jpThu Mar 21 10:43:46 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 11:36:00 +0900
From: "K. BABB"
To: TALISMAN@indiana.edu
Subject: A Little Appreciation
Dear Sonja,
I read your message to Talisman with interest. It is so true, all
of it. The thing that is particularly distressing, as you have
mentioned in other places, is how can people value a publication
if they aren't willing to "invest" in it (i.e. subscribe)? It is
surprising how many people believe that since ARTS DIALOGUE is a
grassroots periodical where everything from articles to production
is non-profit (i.e. no one is paid for their labor), that it should
be free! This kind of logic escapes me. Just the fact that paper
and ink, photocopying services, and postage costs money---not to
mention the time spent typing, editing, working on layout, and doing
the copying and mailing---makes me wonder where these folks imagine
BAFA gets the capital to pay for these. Of course they might feel
that ARTS DIALOGUE isn't worth the cost of the subscription. In that
case, they can subscribe for only a year. That's only fair. But if
they could only realize that, as you rightly stated, ARTS DIALOGUE is
a global publication, they are helping to make this goal possible since
their subscription subsidizes those readers in poorer countries.
Isn't this what Baha'is do every time they contribute to the Funds,
really? Surely, part of what we give to our national fund goes in
some measure to the Universal House of Justice, Continental Fund, the
Arc Fund, or for the up-keep of some House of Worship.
You are right, the bottom line is that most people don't
value art, (no more than they value scholarship!). Life is largely
going to work, coming home and finding some mindless diversion till
they have to go to work again. I think that's because they don't
understand to what degree on a daily basis they interact with creativity
("art"). The general population seems to think that art is only what
you go to museums to see. It is amusing to me to think that even the
diversion they seek all have their elements of creativity! If only
people in general would stop and imagine a world devoid of the beauty
or the thought-provoking significance creativity offers, I should
think they'd appreciation the work artists of all fields do. And that
is all we struggling creators want (well, most of us anyway)---a little
appreciation. And BAFA offers that through ARTS DIALOGUE. Let's not
let THAT die.
With love, Kathleen
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpThu Mar 21 10:45:07 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 14:01:56 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Mysticism Conference Report from Sandra Fotos
Dear Friends:
Sandy Fotos has asked me to forward the following report, which she has
prepared for ABS North America, to Talisman. She would very much appreciate
comments on accuracy and suggestions for improvements. Please contact
her at:
104220.2146@compuserve.com
Yours sincerely, Stephen R. Friberg
........................................................................
Dear friends,
Here's a report of the Bosch Mysticism conference. I'll be sending it to
the ABSs of North American and Japan, so if any of the presenters wish to
comment on/correct my interpretation of their talks or activities (it's
common to forward presentation reviews for comments before the reviews are
sent off for publication), please email me directly at
<104220.2146@compuserve.com>.
Yours, SF
........................................................................
Mysticism Conference at Bosch Baha'i School: Raising the Call for a Rich
Devotional Life
>From February 23 through 24th, a remarkable conference took place at Bosch
Baha'i School, Santa Cruz, California. Envisioned as the first in an annual
series of conferences focusing on the mystical teachings of the Bab,
Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l Baha, the Baha'i Mysticism Conference enabled the
97 participants to develop a greater sense of devotion and mysticism in
their personal lives, and to explore ways to enrich the devotional aspects
of Baha'i community life in general.
Although mysticism has always been part of the religious experience, until
Islam it existed at only the individual level. With the rise of the Sufis
(Islamic mystics) mysticism became a major flow of thought pursuing the
knowledge of transcendent truth through meditation and prayer. By chanting
verses from the Writings, the presence of God is invoked. Musical
repetition of sacred verses sets up a rhythm which naturally units people,
uplifting them so that they are more receptive. Borrowing from this Sufi
tradition, one of the highlights of the Mysticism Conference was its use of
zikr (chanting sacred verses) in the devotional portions of the program.
The program itself was an eclectic combination of scholarly presentations
and uplifting experiential activities such as group zikr, song, art, nature
walks and meditation
The conference began on the evening of Friday, the 23rd with an
introduction by facilitators David Langness and Steven Scholl, followed by
devotions. LuAnne Hightower and Steven Scholl lead the participants in
deeply moving devotional activities based on zikr.
The morning session of the next day began with a meditative spiritual walk,
lead by Teresa Langness and, after devotions, the participants heard three
formal presentations.
The first, 'The Mystical Path in the Writings of Shaykh Ahmad" by Juan
Ricardo Cole of the University of Michigan, was videotaped, with audience
questions and comments provided through a telephone hookup. Speaking of
Baha'u'llah's high praise of Shaykh Ahmad, Cole suggested that we can
benefit from his insights, particularly on meditation. Cole reminded the
audience that the Guardian urged the believers to learn to meditate but did
not prescribe any form. Therefore, Baha'is need to develop a way of
worship, both collective and individual, which has a mystic dimension and
we must look to the Writings for clues to evolve our own spiritual
practices.
The second presentation, " Baha-Maiden Dialogues," was an
exploration of the symbolism of the Divine Feminine by Terry Culhane of
Omaha, Nebraska, Speaking of the inherent presence of the feminine voice in
the Revelation of Baha'u'llah, Culhane suggested that the scriptural Maiden
can be regarded as the embodied remembrance of God, symbolized by the Dove,
and linked to similar symbolism in Islamic poetry and Christianity. Culhane
emphasized that the development of strong Baha'i communities requires the
recognition and honor of the Sacred through the devotional institution of
the Houses of Worship
The third presentation, by Nima Hazini of Albuquerque, New Mexico was
titled "Gnosis: The Quest for Perfection". Defining gnosis as spiritual and
intellectual activity leading to integrated knowledge of the levels of
reality, Hazini discussed the metaphysics of mysticism as it relates to the
three levels of reality, the physical world of thought and emotion, the
imaginal world of energy and the intangible and indescribable spiritual
world.
The afternoon session gave attendees a choice of activities: Teresa
Langeness' meditative nature walk, "A Walk with the Ancients, an art
video, "The Mystical Image," by Sonja van Kerkhoff, featuring poetry by
Sen McGlinn; a workshop on "A Mystical Experience Using Music" by Amir; a
class on "Exploring the Beginnings of Meditation" by Derek Cockshut and a
musical workshop on "Spiritualizing the Community with Music," by Lora
McCall.
A very special evening program was organized by Lora McCall and Terry
Culhane. Preceded by breathing and centering exercises by Erica Batdorf,
this program was perhaps one of the first commemoration of Darvish Sidq Ali
since the time of Baha'u'llah. Darvish Sidq Ali was a Sufi companion of
Baha'u'llah and, in Memorials to the Faithful 'Abdu'l-Baha tells us that
Baha'u'llah, "set apart a special night and He dedicated it to Darvish Sidq
Ali. He wrote that at every year...the dervishes should bedeck a meeting
place, which should be in a flower garden, and gather there to make mention
of God."
After the commemoration LuAnne Hightower and Steven Scholl lead
"Remembrance of God" zikr chanting.
On Sunday morning, after devotions and meditation, the final session of the
conference gave the participants a chance to consult about ways to develop
a devotional side of the Faith equal to its administrative side. Everyone
recognized that the Baha'i community must give believers a spiritually
enriching and satisfying community life. Dr Amin Banani reminded the
friends that there are already rituals in the Faith which can satisfy our
yearning for a more mystical communion with God, such as the daily
Obligatory Prayers, with their choreography and the Fasting Prayers with
their repetitive refrains which lend themselves to zikr expression.
The conference ended after lunch, leaving the participants eager for the
next time!
Reported by Sandra Fotos
Association for Baha'i Studies, Japan
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduThu Mar 21 10:45:42 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:02:26 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Masqud
Sen wrote:
> I'm interested in the Lawh-i-Masqud discussion, beginning with the
> following passage (p 167-8):
> Such exhortations to union and concord as are inscribed
> in the Books of the Prophets by the Pen of the Most High
> bear reference unto specific matters; not a union that would
> lead to disunity or a concord which would create discord.
I think that often we Baha'is are too prone to compromise, in the name of
unity. There are times and places for unity, and sometimes being unified
with a person compromises a more important spiritual principle. There
are times, for example, where the Master said that anger is constructive,
such as with the liar, the tyrant and the thief. This is my
understanding -- to not make unity with others an absolute.
From burlb@bmi.netThu Mar 21 10:48:29 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 23:27 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re-traction
Dear Talischums:
I am compelled to make a re-traction. I accused you all of plotting against
me when the entire time it was really Nima and Ahang who were plotting
against you, or you who were plotting against Nima and Ahang -- I can't
quite recall because it was all second hand rumour from a reliable souse.
I was off devising new eleborate Naw Ruz rituals (Matzos & Bar-B-Q Pork
stuffed in a crab shell and served with harosis and moror) so you can
understand why I would be quick to believe almost anything. When I came to
my senses I was told that I also accused Sonja of being the "Queen of
Nederlander Decopage & Macreme" and demanded to know why the German House of
Worship looks likes *THAT*.
Burl (insecure lay clergy artist)
why *does* it look like that, anyway?
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From iskandar@ns.moran.comThu Mar 21 10:48:57 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 06:15:34 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: primary sources
Abdu'l-Baha did not claim He received "Wahy" (Divine Revelation, Divine Inspiration, or whatever the translation is) from God, did He?
Bye,
Iskandar
----------
From: Sadra[SMTP:sadra@rt66.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 1996 10:28 AM
To: Doug Myers
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: primary sources
>
> My question is this dear friend[if I may call you that as I feel I know a
> little about you from your postings on Talisman], what is your definition of
> primary texts in this case?
>
> Because of Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Ahd & Kitab-i-Aqdas and 'Abdu'l-Baha's Will
> and Testament I included the Guardian and the House of Justice in the term
> primary texts.
>
Dear Doug--
Since the Bab, Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha are the Three Central Figures
of the Baha'i Faith respectively, therefore Their Writings (and
especially those of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha) constitute the primary
texts of this Faith. While Shoghi Effendi was the head of the Faith, and is
the Guardian, and the House its current head, nevertheless since neither
one was/is recipient of Divine Inspiration (in the sense of
'wahy' or 'revelation') nor the Centre of the Covenant, which is the sole
function of the Master, or in any way, shape or manner of equal rank to the
Manifestation & His immediate Successor, hence their corpus cannot be, IMO,
considered primary in the way that that of the Central Figures is but should
be, rather, looked upon as secondary albeit complimentary. Sen, Juan,
Ahang or John can correct me if I'm wrong, though.
Happy-Naw Ruz to one and all!
regards, Nima
**************************************************************
* Paradox is a characteristic of truth. What communis opinio *
* has of truth is surely no more than an elementary deposit *
* of generalizing partial understanding, related to truth *
* even as sulphurous fumes are to lightning. *
* *
* --From the correspondence of Count Paul von Wartenburg *
* and Wilhelm Dilthey *
**************************************************************
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:49:35 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 09:49:08 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: DEREK COCKSHUT
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Fwd: a bunch of thanks
Dear Derek, your posting has just ruined my morning. The thought of our
dear, sweet Burl being hominiplated has brought me nearly to the point of
sobbing. (I would sob but John becomes very upset if I get anything,
even tear drops, on the computer keys. He is still so moody. It doesn't
seem to matter what I do with his marmalade.) Anyway, back to Burl. I
have visions of him (hominid, that he is) being cast in bronze or
whatever and then hung (or is it hanged) on the wall. We would only be
able to see him, not read his sweet, satirical words anymore. What good
would that be? I mean, do YOU want to see Burl hanging on YOUR wall?
What a thought. Oh, the tears are beginning to flow again. I think he
would be advised to drop the Arthur project. The love life of Bosch
teachers/administrators would be a far more fitting topic for his
particular style of writing.
I do wish you would convince Mark that I write a dandy letter of
permission and that I would be more than happy to assist him. Now that
my kids are nearly grown I tend to feel so useless. Writing such
letters of permission would make me feel needed and wanted again. Love,
Linda
From nineteen@onramp.netThu Mar 21 10:50:03 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 09:04:32 -0600 (CST)
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: "Mark A. Foster" , Talisman
Subject: Points of view
Dear Mark,
It is beyond me to understand why you have been receiving so much
criticism. From what I can see you have expressed yourself under all
circumstances in a mild and self-effacing manner. Quite frankly, this
hail of scorn would be withering to most individuals.
I believe you were acting in good faith by asking the House the questions
you did--we are not obliged to be restrained by some imagined *Code of
Silence*. Why your actions have been interpreted as a breach of the
ethos of the group I don't know, but I feel everyone should be allowed to
pursue their involvement with Talsiman, as Baha'is, and not be measured
as members of a sub-group within the Faith, regardless of their
relationship to that group.
The polarization within Talisman need not be antagonistic. However, the
issues in play seem to touch upon the core of the friends belief
structures and bring out hostilities that are quite possibly unconscious.
I would suggest that if we cannot act with some measure of restraint we
will only have those who agree with us to discuss these issues. We
cannot assume we have all the answers. All too often Baha'is of
differing views are driven off Talisman under circumstances that can only
be described as "survival of the fitest". I hope we won't be reduced to
a situation where we simply congratulate each other on seeing things the
same way and hoot the rest off the list.
Richard
Richard C. Logan nineteen@onramp.net
Maintain HomePage "The Baha'is of Lubbock"
http://rampages.onramp.net/~nineteen/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How manifold are the truths which must remain unuttered until the
appointed time is come! Even as it has been said:
"Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can
everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every
timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who
hear it." --Gleanings from the writings of Baha'u'llah
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 10:50:42 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 10:09:49 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
Cc: TALISMAN-LIST ,
Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
Peter Conn ,
Cheshmak A Farhoumand ,
Ronald GLOSSOP , Vonda McCrae ,
Cynthia McDaniel , "I. Olson"
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Welcome to Talisman! This is just the sort of topic we handle here. You
have come to the right place. We have already hashed this out endlessly
but it is a topic that won't go away so why not go over it again?
Perhaps talking about it as a symbol of Baha'u'llah as a male is as good
an answer as any other. However, this answer just reaffirms the common
belief that leadership is a male prerogative and that women are to be
excluded from the really important decisions being made. When the one
administrative body that can overturn any other decisions made anywhere
in the Baha'i world is all male, it is difficult to convince people that
men and women are truly seen as equal in the Baha'i Faith.
As I have said, we have discussed this issue from about every angle
imaginable and there are strong feelings about it, to say the least.
There are those who argue that Baha'u'llah really did not envision a
HOuse of Justice consisting only of men and there are those who dispute
this. There are those that say that say Shoghi Effendi had the last word
and those who argue that the HOuse could overturn his statement. We have
explored why there should be only men and why there should be women
allowed. Then, there are those who think it really wouldn't make any
difference one way or another. I don't know
if we can get any further with this, though I certainly wish we could.
This posting does not help you at all, I know. It is simply to let you
know that we have been around on this one. But no one is going to try to
shut you up if you want to try it again. Linda
From jcdhender@loop.comThu Mar 21 10:52:59 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 07:28:46 -0800
From: The Hendershots
To: 'Talisman'
Subject: Happy Naw-Ruz!
Happy Naw-Ruz to all!
I just wanted to send a note of appreciation to all of you Talismaniacs. I subscribed just around Ayyam-i-Ha and found that Talisman made my Fast and Naw-Ruz more interesting. Many of the postings and quibbles were good "food" for thought when real food wasn't allowed and helped me to take stock of my own Baha'i life in preparation for the new year.
It was lovely receiving the Garden of Justice to read and think about during the Fast; and my family enjoyed the prayer for Naw-Ruz by 'Abdu'l-Baha last night when the sun went down. The postings on Naw-Ruz and how it is celebrated in Iran even got me to clean the house yesterday in preparation for the New Day.
Thank you all. I wish everyone a good year.
Love,
Chris Hendershot
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Mar 21 11:08:02 1996
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 11:06:03 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Masqud
I'm interested in the Lawh-i-Masqud discussion, beginning with the
following passage (p 167-8):
Such exhortations to union and concord as are inscribed
in the Books of the Prophets by the Pen of the Most High
bear reference unto specific matters; not a union that would
lead to disunity or a concord which would create discord.
This is the station where measures are set unto everything, a
station where every deserving soul shall be given his due.
Well is it with them that appreciate the meaning and grasp
the intent of these words, and woe betide the heedless.
Who can gloss this, for one who cannot appreciate the meaning and grasp
the intent?
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-3216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From jrcole@umich.eduThu Mar 21 11:26:34 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 11:06:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Happy Naw Ruz
Dearest Friends:
I'm back from my trip to Morocco, and have finally read all my
accumulated Talisman messages, benefitting, as usual, from the
discussions and the information presented.
I want to wish you all a blessed and joyous Naw-Ruz, and a new year full
of successes both for you and yours and for our beloved Cause of God.
I read all the posts about "laity" and "scholars" and "insecurity" and
past bitternesses, and was saddened that we have not made more progress
in a year and a half than that. But I did want to assure Mark Foster of
my high regard for him, for his intellectual contribution to Talisman,
and for his good intentions in foster-ing a sense of egalitarianism in
the community, with which I fully concur (as I am sure he knows). I wish
you, Mark, with a special warmth, a joyous Naw-Ruz and ensuing year. If
there was in fact, as some have suggested, any element of spite in your
actions (which I am not in a position to judge), I forgive you and hope
by-gones can be by-gones.
Because of professional and family obligations, I fear I am going to have
to be far less active on Talisman for a while than I have been, but I
hope to share some thoughts and results of researches with you all from
time to time.
Let us all take advantage of the New Year, literally "New Day," to put
behind us old grudges and wounds, to renew ourselves as complete and
integral spiritual beings, ready to give, and to forgive, without
sacrificing that analytical incisiveness and critical edge that gives
Talisman its special flavor and allows us to deepen in a new and more
effective way.
much love to you all - Juan
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduThu Mar 21 12:58:23 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 12:04:00 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: Stephan Dimitroff
Cc: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Dear Stephan,
You must be new to Talisman. Otherwise, you would know that if you would
decide to say something to offend me, yo
you must stand in a very long line that forms on the right just behind
an English economist who is always advocating that the Baha'is celebrate
Adam Smith Day as the tenth Baha'i holy day and a Jewish satirist whose
problems start with the fact that he lives in a place called Walla
Walla. Behind these two are all sorts just dying to throw snowballs,
tomatoes or whatever vile debris they happen to have at hand in my
direction. Of course, the line is longer or shorter
ending on exactly what I have most recently posted.
I certainly would not take offense at your posting. Just wait until
you see what I aaccusted to.4inda~4~4~te 1 Mar 1996, Stephan
Dimitroff wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Mar 1996, lwalbrid wrote:
>
> > In bahai-st today:
> >
> > Welcome to Talisman! This is just the sort of topic we handle here. You
> > have come to the right place. We have already hashed this out endlessly
> > but it is a topic that won't go away so why not go over it again?
>
> I can't stop laughing. I don't know if that was your intent, but I think
> this is the funniest thing I have read in a long time. I hope I have not
> offended you. If I do offend, please consider that you have brought me
> no small joy on New Year's Day.
>
> Happy Naw-Ruz,
> S.
>
> Stephan Dimitroff http://www.kmtt.com
> Work: (206) 233-1037 (voice) (206) 233-8979 (fax)
> Home: (206) 838-1498 (Sea) (206) 952-6007 (Tac)
> --------- --------- ---------
> These fruitless strifes, these ruinous wars,
> shall pass and the Most Great Peace shall come.
> Baha'u'llah
>
>
From belove@sover.netThu Mar 21 13:08:12 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 20:27:06 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Alma Engels , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Covenantal Issues was Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy
[The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set]
[Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set]
[Some characters may be displayed incorrectly]
Applause for the questions and the spirit of this inquiry.
On Wed, 20 Mar 1996 10:37:11 -0700 Alma Engels wrote:
but where
>does it say that Baha'is should be the deliberate source of tests for other
>Baha'is?
As my Jewish uncle would say: 'But who else? You wouldn't want it from a stranger would you?'
I know just what you mean! Beside, anyone else you could just ignore.
Philip
From belove@sover.netThu Mar 21 13:08:32 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 07:46:51 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: Bob Switzer ,
Steve Proskauer , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: more apologies
I keep receiving multiple copies of a frivolous post I sent out on the 19th and I'm concerned that my friends are getting it too. All the copies are dated as though sent on the 19th, all from the same time, and I don't know why it keeps happening. deepest apologies. I feel as though I'd made a minor joke and it keeps getting repeated back to me. It's like a strange version of hell. I'm tempted to search my character for the hidden message from the cybernet/universe.
Philip
-------------------------------------
Name: Philip Alan Belove
Anagram: Plain Livable Hope
E-mail: belove@sover.net
Date: 03/21/96
Time: 07:46:51
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler -- A. Einstein
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comThu Mar 21 16:04:40 1996
Date: 21 Mar 96 14:01:04 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The Naw-Ruz present
Dear Talismanians,
A hearty welcome to John Dale, whose remarkable first posts made eminent
sense and revealed a mind whose depth and capacity for nuance I've long
respected.
And a very happy Naw-Ruz to one and all!
Last night, at our community's celebration, a believer came who hadn't
been active for many years, even though she had lived in our city since
birth. I spent some time talking to her, trying to make her feel
welcome (ever notice how Baha'is sometimes tend to shun "newcomers" in
our midst, even though they're Baha'is, too? Very puzzling.), and just
generally chatting about her period of inactivity, which I found helpful
to address directly. I told her that even Baha'u'llah withdrew from the
community for two years, and that seemed to make her feel less alienated
in some way.
But she told me something I wanted to pass on to all of you. She said
that what drew her back to activity was the sense she had gotten in
recent Baha'i publications, which represented her only contact with the
Faith for years, that we as a community were attempting to deal more
directly with problems, and not "sweep them under the rug and pretend
anymore." She had been especially heartened by some of the recent
exchanges in the American Baha'i, and she specifically mentioned two,
one being Peter Khan's recent talk about mental tests, which had a
significant impact on her thinking.
"When I used to be active," she told me, "I thought there was an enormous
amount of pressure in the community to be perfect. After a while I
figured either everyone was perfect except me, or they were all troubled
like I was and faking it. Maybe now that's starting to change."
At any rate, I thought her sentiments were the nicest Naw-Ruz gift I've
gotten in a long time.
Love,
David
From L. Thu Mar 21 16:05:33 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 20:53:16 +0100 (MET)
From: L.
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: new prayer
I hope you all had as enjoyable a Naw-Ruz celebration as we had. We
celebrated the beginning of the new year with the German-speaking Belgian
Baha'is.
The Naw-Ruz prayer by Abdu'-Baha and translated by Shoghi Effendi, which Dr.
Armstrong-Ingram so kindly posted, is not unpublished. It was probably
published in *Star of the West*. I say probably because I did not note down
where I photocopied it from. It might have been *Baha'i News*, but the
typeset looks like that of *Star of the West*. I suspect the same is true
for the other "unpublished" translations Dr. Armstrong-Ingram found.
Probably Abdu'l-Baha's Naw-Ruz prayer was not included in the prayer book to
save space. Perhaps the editors did not see the utility of including two
prayers which could be used only once a year and gave priority to the prayer
revealed by Baha'u'llah.
Sincerely,
L.
From Member1700@aol.comThu Mar 21 16:06:32 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:23:01 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Naw-Ruz greetings!
My last message, with no subject, was actually a Naw-Ruz card. The computer
ate the first couple of sentences. (Well, computers have to live too, I
guess.)
Anyway, Joyous Naw-Ruz greetings to all. (You know that Kalimat Press HAS
published a book on the subject, right?)
Many thanks to Jackson for bringing Shoghi Effendi's translation of
'Abdu'l-Baha's prayer for Naw-Ruz to light! More, Jackson, more!
Tony
From Member1700@aol.comThu Mar 21 16:06:53 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:30:49 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
Dearest brother John:
I am afraid that there is no consensus on Talisman concerning reasons for
the exclusion of women from the House of Justice at this time--at least there
is none on Talisman. I, for one, believe that there is no reason for this
and that women can and should be elected to our Supreme Body in the future.
Anyway, we have had endless discussions of this issue on Talisman,
and--if you want several hours of reading material--we do have an archivist,
Eric Pierce, who can provide you will all the juicy details. Eric?
Warmest Naw-Ruz greetings,
Tony
From ahriazati@ccgate.hac.comThu Mar 21 16:08:39 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 12:35:36 PST
From: ahriazati@ccgate.hac.com
To: iskandar@ns.moran.com
Cc: rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Sources
Dear Iskandar, Allah'u'abha
Thank you very much for your message and sorry that it took
me long time to answer you. As to your questions regarding
the Typing project, I will send you a separate message explaining
the ways that you could assist us.
As to the INBA volumes that Ahang Rabbani has refereed to during his
postings on Talisman network- it stands for Iran National
Baha'i Archives. This term is refereed to two sets of collections:

1. It primarily refers to a volumes of manuscripts that they
total about 28 volumes. This is refereed to usually as INBA library.

2. The other set is refereed to as INBA volumes is the one which
Iran NSA, concerned about the preservation of manuscript materials,
produced a limited number of XEROX volumes reproduced from
originals in the possession of various bodies and individuals.Since
the materials in this set contain materials that are distinct from
those in INBA then some authors have refereed to it as INBAMC which
stands for INBA Manuscript collections.

One *****very important thing *** about this set is that IS NOT
checked by anyone on a very systematic fashions to determine the
fate of majority of it's contents specially the sections including
the writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah.
To give an example, The volume #1 is titled as " The writings of
the Bab" which contains few works of which only ** ONE ** is by
the Bab and rest is by Yahya Azal.
Another example is volume 80 which Ahang listed once as 80a .
This volume was titled as " The writings of the first Believers of
the Bab along with some of the Bab's writings" Almost the whole
thing in this set was the work of YAHYA AZAL. This is why later
on it was replaced by a new volume number 80. So there was no 80a
or 80b rather it was a ** COMPLETE** replacement.
In the volumes containing the writings of Baha'u'llah
there are *** MANY *** errors found even in a tablets
that are already PUBLISHED.
Considering the above facts, I do not think we should use this
set as a reference point for any SERIOUS scholarly work that we
are doing such as the one which Sen is undertaking. Until such
time that we have a very sound idea about this set. The work
is being done to achieve this goal.

As to the list itself, there are 105 volumes of which 98 are the
actual works and the rest is the LISTING of those works (* vols.
100-106 *) and vol. 70 contains the list of published works .

The title for number 5 and 6 in Ahang's list is correct but
the author of the two volumes containing the notes on Aqdas
is not Fadil-i- Mazanderani rather it is Fadil-i YAZDI.
In short, my humble experience on working on the materials
in this set , AS THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, will not be that useful
and we should avoid referring to them as the source for our
thoughts.
With warmest regards; Habib Riazati
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlThu Mar 21 17:01:01 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 22:40:40 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: women & UHJ
Dear John,
an interesting thought. 9 is the number of Baha so it is symbolic
that there be 9 members. But in practice there may be more and
there are still a 'symbolic' nine/baha of them, right?
And male membership is symbolic of the fact that the
Manifestation chose to grace a male body this time round, but in
practice there may be women members too, while the House would
remain symbolicaly male, right? Nine men and ten women to make a
nice round 19?
Or was this maybe not where your analogy between maleness and nineness
was heading?
As you will see from the brief abstract of Terry Culhane's paper at the
Mysticism conference, there are good grounds for considering
Baha'u'llah's Manifestation Soul (as distinct from his human soul) as
feminine. Prima facia, one might think that this would indicate that
only other people with feminine souls should be members (following
your symbolism argument), but this would be to confuse a symbol with
an imitation. A crown is a symbol of a king, but the crown doesn't
resemble the king, it re-enacts the idea of a human king in a lower
level of reality (the material). So if the Manifestation Soul is indeed to
be thought of as feminine (the maid of heaven), it doesn't follow that
the members of the House of Justice should also have feminine souls.
To be symbols of that reality, they should reflect it, but at a lower
level of reality. The symbolic reflection of that great feminine principle
is therefore not a feminine soul, but a feminine body, and a beautiful
one. For the most consumate symbolism, therefore, membership of the
Universal House of Justice should be restricted to beautiful young
women under the age of 19.
To get a little serious, I think that the diplomatic response of the world
centre staffer was perfect. There is no explanation which has any
degree of consensus acceptance (including your own rather original
one, first because no-one has had a chance to hear it
previously, and second because it could be extended to
exclude all non-Persians, who cannot symbolize Baha'u'llah quite
as well as Persian gentlemen can, and the non-Persians in their
foolish attachment to liberal agendas and western preconceptions
have resisted this mightily).
There is also insufficient consensus that the various arguments in
the Writings against the exclusion of women are strong enough
to warrant opening membership to women (The decision is the
House of Justice's, of course, but the need to preserve the unity of
the community makes it unlikely that any step would be taken
which might undermine the perceived legitimacy of the House in
they eyes of any substantial portion of the community). Thus far,
we are still in the situation where these arguments cannot even
be formally published and circulated in the Baha'i community, so
an effective concensus on the issue is obviously a long way off.
The various arguments proposed to support the exclusion (women
are too compassionate, they have periods and children to look
after, etc etc) seem, if you will excuse the value judgement, too
silly to have any chance of standing the test of time, while the
arguments in favour of admitting women do have at least the
flavour of a sound textual basis and historical plausability, but
they are not absolutely water-tight and are not widely known.
Thus consensus-forming on either side of the argument is
unlikely, and this question will be with us for a long time to
come.
However the arguments for and against have been aired on
Talisman. I've filed 131 incoming messages on the topic myself, and
I'm rather selective in what I keep, about 10% of all postings. (I
know you asked for just the best thinking on the topic, but
modesty prevents me saying how much I've posted myself.-) Do
you really want the whole set? In any case, I have a copy of the
paper "The Service of Women on the Institutions..." in my
archives, and when that has been inwardly digested you're
welcome to more.
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-3216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From mfoster@qni.comThu Mar 21 18:33:15 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:30:23 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
At 09:04 AM 3/21/96 -0600, Richard C. Logan wrote:
>It is beyond me to understand why you have been receiving so much
>criticism. From what I can see you have expressed yourself under all
>circumstances in a mild and self-effacing manner. Quite frankly, this
>hail of scorn would be withering to most individuals.
Hi, Richard -
Thank you for your kind remarks. The comments do not bother me much
personally. The Guardian did say that our greatest tests would come from our
fellow believers. However, I am, fortunately I suppose, accustomed to the
responses I have received off and on over the past year on Talisman. ;-)
Where the verbal *scoldings* _do_ concern me is on the level of Baha'i
community life. Honestly, concern is a bit of an understatement. I literally
got physically sick for several days this past week over certain postings on
this list. If we as Baha'is cannot be united in our diversity and tolerant
of each other, what reason can we give to others when inviting them to join
the world community of Baha?
>The polarization within Talisman need not be antagonistic. However, the
>issues in play seem to touch upon the core of the friends belief
>structures and bring out hostilities that are quite possibly unconscious.
Actually, I do not see why a polarization into different camps should exist
at all, but, at least from my observations, it clearly does. As I have
stated before, I think that the culture war of the larger society is being
played out on Talisman. As Baha'is, I don't think that we should have any
part of it. Yet, I see periodic postings here which exult in being
associated with a particular cultural or political position.
Certainly, there are "modernists," "liberals," "social democrats,"
"conservatives," "traditionalists," and "fundamentalists" in the Baha'i
community. However, from my POV, to the extent that these worldly ideologies
(or _false gods_) exist among us, it shows that we are not sufficiently
detached from the great divisions in human society. The consequences of that
attachment, IMHO, are played out regularly on the list. While we can learn
from all human world views, we should, to my understanding, be attached to
none of them. Our only focus, as I see it, should be on bringing forth into
reality the written Word of God:
It is incumbant on every man of insight and
understanding to strive to translate that
which hath been written into reality and
action. - Baha'u'llah
And to Juan:
I just read your message. Thank you for your kind remarks. I can state
without any qualification whatsoever that there was absolutely no
mean-spiritedness, or spite, as you say, in my decision to write the House
of Justice. My only purpose was to request a clarification on the points
that were raised at that time on Talisman, and I felt that the other list
subscribers would enjoy reading the response, too. As you could probably
sense from my own postings, I was very disappointed over the negative
reactions I received from a few of the friends. I suppose I found it
difficult to understand how writing to the Supreme Body, the "source of
good," could have been seen as tattling.
To the Light, Mark (Foster)
****************************************************************************
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * Sociologist of Religion * Full-Time College Faculty
Sociology, JCCC, 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210 * 913/768-4244
Dir., Reality Sciences Inst. * Acad. Dir., Found. for the Science of Reality
Staff, 4 Compuserve & AOL Forums * Owner, 3 EMail Lists * List Co-Moderator
Board of Dirs./Exec. V.P./Talent, Tektite Films * BBS Sysop (913/768-1113)
****************************************************************************
"The Prophets of God have been the Servants of Reality; Their Teachings
constitute the science of reality." - `Abdu'l-Baha
"The sciences of today are bridges to reality; if they lead not to reality,
naught remains but fruitless illusion." - `Abdu'l-Baha
From DaveTayl@cris.comThu Mar 21 18:34:02 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:32:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Dave Taylor
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
>Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:55:10
>To: "Mark A. Foster" , lua@sover.net (LuAnne Hightower),
talisman@indiana.edu
>From: Dave Taylor
>Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there
was only one.
>
>At 04:12 PM 3/20/96 -0600, Mark A. Foster wrote:
>
>>LuAnne -
>>
>>Thanks for your note. While I agree that some people have not been subjected
>>to harsh verbal assault from other Talismanians, that has not been the case
>>with everyone. I have myself been referred to as a fundamentalist, a
>>premodernist, a fascist, and other labels on Talisman, and I have seen the
>>same, or worse, happen to others.
>>
>>To the Light, Mark (Foster)
>>
>
>Dear Earnest Mark!
>
>Do you have to take offense at being identified with these various
positions? Speaking for myself, I am a fan of Marinetti and Boccioni and
Ezra Pound and Emil Nolde,even Leni Refenstahl (all fascists), as well as
D.W. Griffith (glamorizer of the Ku Klux Klan) and such serious avowed
Communists as el Lizitsky, Sergei Eisenstein and Natalia Gonchorova as well
as that famous commissar Kandinsky and such "fellow travellers" as Picasso
and Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger as well as such quitessentially "decadent"
artists as George Grosz and Andy Warhol. I see the faith reflected in every
mirror, however tarnished or distorted(such as myself), as the faith
represents the height of -all- human aspirations, and, as such, aspects of
its truth can be found everywhere(even,at times, in the Baha'i Community
itself) however mishandled or misused. The principle of the oneness of
humanity requires that we recognize this and extend our sympathies as
broadly as we can to bring together the "sparks" embedded wherever there is
life(to use a Jewish metaphor.) So, I have sympathy for some ideals imbedded
in fascism, as also communism and anarchism and every other ism i can think
of. (I am particularly fond of what you have labelled a form of
"neo-Lutheranism," Mark, as you know.) This doesn't mean I accept all these
contradictory movements uncritically, of course, but they all represent
human aspirations and as such bear some relation to the currents of
progressive thought within the Faith and without. Many writers have noted,
for example, the strong influence of fascist ideologies on the development
of modernist art and architecture, and the initial -support- of fascist
movements and govenments for modernism. Also, strong connections between
fascism and post-modernism exist (through Heidegger,for example). And when
Italy and,especially, Germany turned against modern art, their polemic bore
striking resemblance to the anti-modernist polemic not only of the Soviet
Union(which also had initially supported modernist abstract art) but also to
that of Shoghi Effendi, who also spoke of modern art in terms of "decadence"
and "the prostitution of art and literature."( This is more than a
coincidence of terms, by the way, but reflects a strong current of Western
criticism at the turn of the century, as in, for example, Spenser,Max Nordau
and even in August Forel's international bestseller of 1905, "The Sexual
Question." (see"Expressionism,Art and Idea" by Donald E. ,Yale
University Press,1987) At the same time, the Faith remains the Faith, and
I can look sympathetically on movements working to erode the moral standards
upheld by the faith, even regard them as necessary to the correct
understanding and ultimate embrace by humanity of those standards, without
arguing at all that the laws and standards of the Faith should be changed.
Traditional moral standards rest, after all, on jerrybilt foundations
hastily and carelessly put together in the face of the collapse of the
religious and moral authorities of the old order in the last century and
thus are inherently flawed and unstable. The faith is here to heal the
alienation, the disruption which the faith itself can be said to have
caused, the crisis which charecterizes modernism. The future cannot be
pre-modern or modern or even post-modern but must involve elements of
traditional stable societysuch as the traditional sense of the human
community as a single organism with strong and vital elements of modern
individualism and relativity.
>
>
>
>And so, Mark, when someone identifies you,for whatever reason, with fascism
or fundamentalism or whatever, say, as Walt Whitman did, "Yes! I contain
multitudes!" If someone were to question the covenantal orthodoxy of my
position, I would endeavor to sharpen my limits to keep my reasoning within
bounds. I would not be offended. I am always struggling to get at a
universal vision without falling into the abyss of "everything is permitted."
>
>Bliss and Fire and even Coca Cola,
>
>dave taylor
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Love's a stranger to earth and heaven too
In him are lunacies seventy and two (Seven Valleys of Baha'u'llah)
Love does not care for good reason
Love forever heals the wounds it makes (from a poem written when i was
clinically insane)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduThu Mar 21 18:34:32 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:34:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Aha & Haha / Nuclear Talisman
Allah'u'Abha Friends!
A couple of well intended non-sequiteurs from out here in left field on
this New Day... One of several reflective postings with which I'll close out
my participation on this list for a while.
1. Aha! & Haha!: Balance and Integration
The recent thread on Talisman as Comedy prompted some musing on sense of
humor, sense of wonder / awe, and other modes of emothion/thought/expression
which we see verbal reflections of in this medium. The idea that we should
detatch ourselves a bit from the content of the traffic on the list and try to
see the humor in our common struggles and predicaments has some merit. A
sense of humor can go a long way in helping to break tension & (indirectly)
build unity. Yet the cynic and the nihilist (no I'm not thinking of anyone
on Talisman!) also sees a kind of humor in life, but this yields only a
dull-eyed laugh. ANd the cynic and nihilist have a diminished sense of wonder/
awe.
I've long been interested in the connection between a sense of humor and a
sense of wonder. THe sense of wonder or awe is the ability to still be
impressed with the majesty and intricacy of creation. It is perhaps a matured
rather than lost innocence. This sense is cultivated in spiritual growth. In
tandem with a sense of humor it would seem to be a guard against cynicism.
THe sense of humor, for its part is the celebratory, joyful counterpart to
awe, our connection with action and living. We need both, it seems to me,
together and in some sort of balance. Anyway, this is my perspective so far.
On Talisman, it seems as if humor and wonder/awe are segregated. Some have
tried to their credit to introduce humor into the mix of messages. Generally
it is separate from the other messages, so far as I've noted, and sometimes
it's just inside jokes or simply silliness. THe sense of wonder comes through
in the translations and in some of the commentary on these and other Writings.
I don't know how it would be to integrate both humor and awe more in the
intellectual discussions--I'm not even sure how it can be done. But it would
be an interesting evolution.
2. Nuclear Talisman: Fission to Fusion? (or Evolving Metaphor?)
A thought occurred to me while in the shower one early morning during the
Fast. The interactions on Talisman as nuclear reactions. Sometimes seeming to
get out of control, then being brought under control. Sometimes individuals
play the role of graphite rods, other times the same individuals play the role
of the fuel and the rods (can anyone follow this??). In the process generating
heat and light, but also dangerous waste (some words/phrases can affect people
in a way and for a duration of time that we would never imagine when using
them; I often think of a quote of Baha'u'llah that the effect of a word can
last longer than that of an action [I'll try to remember to look it up]). The
principle of fission, of course is disaggregation, division of atoms.
Then I thought of fusion - the combination of atoms which results in more
energy than fusion (& an interesting commentary on the greater power of unity
on the atomic level) and no radioactive waste. What would that metaphor
represent in the functioning of a list like Talisman? COmbining of ideas?
Merging of perspectives / points of view? Bringing minds and hearts together
for the Cause of God? Maybe there's some "fusion" happening already on this
list (as well as other Baha'i lists). Can that be enhanced and the dynamic of
"fission" be reduced? How?
In any event, I think it is useful to try to see what Talisman will be
accomplishing in the future. At the outset of every endeavor it is incumbent
to look to the end of it (paraphrase of Baha'u'llah). A list with ongoing
discussions does not have an "end" in the sense that discrete endeavors do, but
it has impacts and effects and these perhaps can be anticipated at various
points in the future. Furthermore, lists often tend to go through evolutionary
phases--change is inevitable. A metaphor such as this or a better one might
help to frame our understanding of that evolution and perhaps to guide it
within the context of the growth and development of the Baha'i community.
(In addition to a metaphor, and even before same, should be an anchoring or
centering in the Writings. This I'll try to address in a brief comment on the
Lawh-i-Maqsud.)
Happy New Year to all!! Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
From alma@indirect.comThu Mar 21 18:36:05 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:36:35 -0700
From: Alma Engels
To: "Richard C. Logan" ,
Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
Richard, you chose an excellent subject for the presentation of this
message. And I would like to present a different point of view.
You speak of a "hail of scorn" for Mark. And there have been some negative
comments about the way he presented Talisman to the UHJ. As you note, he
had every right to present the matter to the House. But those Talismanians
who thought there was misrepresentation also had every right to state that.
Somehow it seems hard for anyone person to state things in a balanced manner
(me excluded of course!!!!!!!!).
Something else that occurs to me when we discuss "hails of scorn" is how
very one-sided your concern and that of many others here seems to be. If
Mark was scorned, it was no more, and probably to a lesser, extent than
David was after he posted his retraction and Counsellor Birkland posted a
long message which was essentially what the NSA of the USA told him
(Counsellor Birkland). Though I no longer have the posts, I remember an air
of smugness and condemnation of David in several messages here. I for one
reserved judgement thinking that the David I knew from Talisman could not be
as the House depicted unless he had multiple personalities. But many
thought they had all the information they needed and that justified their
posts. Since then David has given us additional information which makes the
situation clear and shows that he acted in good faith. Whether the NSA
acted deliberately or simply was clumsy in how it handled the situation (and
I incline to the latter view as the right information may not have reached
the right person at the right time), it did misrepresent David and present
him in a very negative manner. Now I wonder when the situation has been
cleared up, we are not seeing posts on Talisman publicly acknowledging that
David was wrongly judged here. Seems to me that unless and until we can
acknowledge our mistakes, we and the Faith have little chance of fulfilling
our destiny.
Finally you state:
> All too often Baha'is of
>>differing views are driven off Talisman under circumstances that can only
>>be described as "survival of the fitest
I think this is a very one-sided statement. In the year I have been here I
have seen many join Talisman and find it not exactly as expected. That
there were points of view presented here that are only infrequently seen
elsewhere. Some of these unsubscribed as they decided Talisman was too
disturbing and not for them. That is fine. No email list is for everyone.
I, myself, find bahai.women.converse stultifying and no longer subscribe to
it. But some others who joined Talisman and were disconcerted at what was
posted, immediately replied with an opposing opinion which was presented as
THE Baha'i opinion seemingly confident that this would clarify the matter
once and for all on Talisman. And these people seemed surprised when
well-supported counter opinions were presented. Some of these people did
leave Talisman. And some learned to present their opinions in ways
acceptable to Talisman. Today they post these opinions and defend them.
That is how Talisman is designed to work. One can join any number of lists
if one wants to see all or nearly all posts made in uncritical way. It
seems to me a misuse of Talisman to attempt to force it into such a mold.
Strong statements from me for the start of the New Year. May it be a
blessed one for each and every one of you and may we all grow in our
understanding -- and most especially may we all grow in our love of God and
Baha'u'llah.
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
From DaveTayl@cris.comThu Mar 21 18:36:48 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 17:43:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Dave Taylor
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re:My Strange Ideas and Attitudes Toward Homosexuality In Japan and the US
>Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:54:43
>To: Talisman@indiana.edu
>From: Dave Taylor
>Subject: Re:My Strange Ideas and Attitudes Toward Homosexuality In Japan
and the US
>
>
>I have been "out of commission" for awhile, but I cannot return without
briefly picking up this old thread which I left dangling. It started when
Stephen Friberg wrote that homosexuality is an American preoccupation of no
concern to the Japanese, who are tolerant but never discuss such things.
This I found hard to believe, and, as Stephen admits, homosexuality is a
staple of Japanese talk shows. But the attitude of indifference Stephen
cited does exist, as it existed in Victorian England or at the same time in
France, and, I asserted for similar reasons having to do with assumptions of
male privelege. (in switching providers I lost everything, so i cannot
repost even if someone wants me to:-( )
>I asserted my own view, that the modern perception of homosexuality as a
"condition" has created not only the view of homosexuality as a pathology
but also the emergence of a worldwide homosexual community as a pressure
group whose uncontestable moral authority in the face of crisis and
opposition and multi-dimensional success will eventually lead to the
universal recognition of homosexual potentials in humans. At that point
neither "homophobia" or "homosexuality" as we know them will cease to exist
but both will take milder, quieter forms, as they will not be seen as
exclusive burdens of any portion of the population. As such sexual feelings
become more available to all, the need to "act them out" will lessen, and
the faith's prohibition against sexual activity" no matter how devoted and
fine the love may be between members of the same sex" will not appear
extraordinary, although the idea that some would quietly "fail" to always
avoid such activity will not appear extraordinary either. Thus "gay
liberation" will itself in the fullness of time lead to a state of society
that will ease the present tension over this issue. Thus my position is
both dialectical and paradoxical, but it fits the facts as I understand them
and I am willing to discuss it. I acknowledge that the position of
homosexually oriented people in the Faith is difficult and will only get
more difficult for a significant period of time into the future, as the
trend toward openness continues, because their options for an open way of
life will be much greater outside the Faith and this open lifestyle will be
creative and productive.To a lesser extent this is also true for all liberal
sympathizers such as myself, as well as all of us who have found peace in
conventional marriage elusive, and doubtless the Baha'i position on
homosexuality will continue for some time to be one of the greatest barriers
keeping many good-hearted people out of the faith. The world needs many
non-Baha'is. At the same time, we are witnessing a flowering of explicit
homosexual culture that is a wonderful and necessary part of the formation
of the new world culture.
>
>At 12:05 AM 3/14/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>In a message dated 96-02-03 10:20:40 EST, friberg@will.brl.ntt.jp (Stephen R.
>>Friberg) writes:
>>
>>>Dear Dave:
>>>
>>>In your letter of Jan. 23, you raised several issues which concerned Japan.
>>>I want to reply to the points you raise, but before I do, let me briefly
>>>repeat some of your arguments [in parentheses].
>>>
>>>[To understand sexuality in Japan, you argued, it is necessary to consider
>>>the relationship of sexuality to the development of modern feminism.
>>>Japanese society, you argued, is repressive like Victorian England or 19th
>>>century France in its attitudes: Japanese society is oriented toward "male
>>>pleasure and prerogative."]
>>>
>>>The analogy is mistaken, I believe, and doesn't lead to an understanding of
>>>Japanese society.
>>
>I did not say that Japanese culture was derived from the British, but the
structural similarity in terms of attitudes toward sexual practice and
priviledge are striking, and in fact nothing in your description contradicts
what I have said!
>
>> Morality in Japan is mainly Confucian with a mix of
>>>Shinto purification rites and Buddhist otherworldlyness. The emphasis is on
>>>correctness in relationships - family, company, community - with built in
>>>safety valves. Let me illustrate a typical safety valve: the drunken
>>company
>>>picnic under the blooming cherry trees. Having consumed sufficient
>>>quantities of beer, whiskey, or sake, the younger worker insults the boss
>>and
>>>his-coworkers to their face, saying what he really feels. The next day, it
>>>is not mentioned, rather it is completely forgotten, in fact it *must* be
>>>forgotten. Such things are allowed when drunk.
>
>
>>>Popular culture for 400 years has had a similar safety valve: the ukiyo, or
>>>"floating world." The word and its associations come from Buddhism: this
>>>world is like an illusion, a mirage, it is unreal. So, take pleasure in its
>>>illusions, enjoy it when you can, throw discipline and its accompanying
>>>illusions to the side, at least for the night! This culture was the culture
>>>of the pleasure quarters, the special walled-in part of the cities where
>>>prostitution was allowed to flourish, where kabuki plays, ukiyoe Japanese
>>>prints developed, and where art, entertainment, prostitution, and the
>>>culinary arts produced the geisha house. In time, this popular culture
>>>broadened its appeal and almost became the culture!
>
>Again, this is strikingly similar to the 19th Ceentury European attitude.
In Europe as well actresses were famous as much for their erotic conquests
as for their conquests on the stage, and were assumed to be or have been
prostitutes and often were. Paris and London certainly had their "pleasure
quarters," and, while their esthetic may not have been as refined or open as
the Japanese, European artists appreciated Japanese poetry and art not only
for their formal innovations but for their expression of a way of life which
struck the Europeans as modern. You will recall, for example, that Degas, a
great connousseur of Japanese prints, lived in brothels for weeks at a time,
as did Toulouse Latrec.
>>>So, there always has been a certain permissiveness toward sexuality.
>>>Granted, men, of course, were allowed much more freedom than women. But it
>>>was the courtesan who was celebrated. Her freedom and boldness and beauty
>>>still thrills when we see the old popular prints, now highly priced
>>>collectors' items. This was not the everyday housewife's world, but it does
>>>not speak of a repressive society.
>
>"Repressive" is a funny word. One must always ask "repressive -for whom.-In
the sixties a number of factors, including "the pill" and the victory of
penicillan over syphilis led to a movement of "sexual liberation" which
proved to be so repressive for women, who were expected to bed free
gentlemen without expectation of commitment or respect, that it became one
of the launching points for the new wave of feminism which exploded in the
"70's. Similarly, 19th Century England and France were not sexually
repressive for gentlemen, and both saw a tremendous rise in the population
of prostitutes, a small number of whom, of course, were quite successful and
well- known, such as actresses like Sarah Bernhardt and others who were
lucky and clever enough to bed kings and the like. That the Japanese
tradition may have been older and had a religious justification rather than
the pseudo-scientific justifications used in Europe is no large distinction,
except that the Japanese system has proved more durable. Still, since World
War II, the Japanese system of sexual relations has come under tremendous
pressure and is undergoing change.
>
> [If you haven't yet, read the 11th
>>century
>>>story Genji Monogatori, the world's first novel and still one of the
>>>greatest. Written by a leisured noblewoman, it tells of a strangely amoral
>>>society, typified by pursuit of pleasure, and tempered by a Buddhist
>>>awareness of the vanity of it all!]
>>>
>>>Until recently, most Japanese were farmers, so farmers' attitudes toward
>>>these issues are very important for what you are considering. Japanese
>>>farming is different that European or American farming: plots are small,
>>>often flooded paddies, cultivation extensively by human hands, and organized
>>>around the family, with all helping. Men and women were often equals in
>>this
>>>world, or in the modern world of small shops and businesses. It is here
>>that
>>>you see why some thinkers still see Japan as a matriarchical society.
>>>
>In Europe too, traditional society was more egalitarian and inequalities
were consistently exxagerated by the effects of urbanization and
industrialization. See for instance, Peter Laslett's "The World We Have
Lost" for a description of pre-industrial English society.
>
>>>[As Japan becomes more open, perhaps through the influence of western
>>>feminism, attitudes toward women's sexuality will change. Correspondingly,
>>>attitudes toward homosexuality will change as "men are forced to imagine as
>>a
>>>human possibility a sustained sexual attraction for men." In a similar
>>>manner, you argue, "homophobia--fear of homosexuality, especially male
>>>homosexuality--rises as women assert themselves." Labeling of homosexuals
>>as
>>>"deviant" allows dominant heterosexual males to deny homosexual potential
>> in
>>>themselves.]
>>>
>>>What has happened is quite different. Women lately (i.e., the last ten
>>>years), like men, seem to see their youth as a time for sexual freedom
>>before
>>>marrying after, say, 27 years old or so. The newspapers report that this
>>>attitude has extended to the point that high school girls from ordinary
>>>families see nothing wrong in funding their clothes purchases by a trick or
>>>two. Missionaries chalk it up to the lack of a major religion, or at least
>>a
>>>new one. Buddhism was already over one thousand years old when it reached
>>>Japan, they point out.
>>>
>This sort of change is coming to America too. When I said that feminism
would be a stimulus for change I didn't mean that all the changes would be
ideal! Feminism isn't the only influence in the mix either, but these girls
you write of are certainly making their own choices, and when they find they
are getting a raw deal they will begin to speak up about it and ultimately
they will make themselves heard, especially they will hear each other. The
alternating waves of "sexual liberation" and feminist protest that have
characterized American experience will be discernable in Japan as well.
(here in the U.S. we are in a "post-feminist" phase.)
>>>Will feminism change things? What does this mean with relationship to
>>>homosexuality? These are not easy questions to answer: I don't have the
>>>feeling that women are suppressed in Japan as they often are or have been
>>>elsewhere. Taken advantage of economically? Yes. Not given an equal role
>>in
>>>public affairs in society? Yes. Downtrodden and suppressed? No. As a
>>>result, Japanese women seem to lack the anger that fuels feminism elsewhere.
>>
>>Famous last words. I wonder what the Princess would say, could she speak!
>>
>>>Will Japanese men be threatened by womanly sexuality? In the main, no. It
>>>doesn't seem to have bothered them for the last two thousand years. Why
>>>should it now?
>>
>Such a paradise! I think you might be missing something!
>>
>>>Will men give up their mistresses? I think so. Women don't like men who
>>>cheat on them and don't help take care of the family, and these days, they
>>>get to choose whom they marry.
>>>
>>>Will homosexuality be a big thing in the future? Well, its becoming popular
>>>on Japanese TV talks shows as a way to be a personality! Certainly, there
>>is
>>>a gay subculture. But, my guess is that the traditional attitudes will
>>>continue: there will be certain occupations, groups, etc., where it is
>>>acceptable and even fashionable, but these will be a "special quarters," a
>>>"floating world" off by itself, a safety valve, and Japan's family and
>>>work-centered mainstream culture will continue as it long has.
>
>This idea of Japan--you would think it was an island apart from the rest of
the world. That world has been ending for a long time--at least since 1853
when those ships sailed into Edo's harbor. Ghettos do not hold. Not Berlin,
not New York or San Francisco, nowhere, ever. We will all have to become
one people.
>
>yours,
>
>dave taylor
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Love's a stranger to earth and heaven too
In him are lunacies seventy and two (Seven Valleys of Baha'u'llah)
Love does not care for good reason
Love forever heals the wounds it makes (from a poem written when i was
clinically insane)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From mfoster@qni.comThu Mar 21 18:37:17 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 16:59:02 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: Dave Taylor , "Mark A. Foster" ,
LuAnne Hightower , Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Which camp should I be trying to get into? I thought there was only one.
Dave -
You sent your message to talisman@cris.com. I made the correction before
sending you this reply. Perhaps you will want to resend your original
message to Talisman.
>Do you have to take offense at being identified with these various
>positions?
I no longer take personal offense, but I did see it as divisive. I agree
that one may be influenced by a variety of positions. To me, that it
wonderful. We are here to learn from all human and spiritual wisdom -
filtered, IMO, through the Baha'i model of reality. My feeling, however, is
that one should not wholeheartedly commit oneself to a particular worldview.
For instance, both modernism and fundamentalism, when applied to religion,
represent, as I see them, imperfect human attempts to grasp something which
is not fully human. Personally, I think that we can gradually transcend this
tendency by looking at existence from a God's-eye viewpoint, i.e., from the
perspectives of the Teachings.
You have named some of the individuals and movements that have affected your
view. As I have said before, I have also been influenced by a variety of
theories and individuals, i.e., Sorokin's integralism, Durkheimian and
Marxian structuralism, philosophical hermeneutics, etc. To my understanding,
developing an appreciation for the products of the human spirit is
commendable. All truth comes from one Source - no matter what the channel.
To the Light, Mark (Foster)
****************************************************************************
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. * Sociologist of Religion * Full-Time College Faculty
Sociology, JCCC, 12345 College Blvd., Overland Park, KS 66210 * 913/768-4244
Dir., Reality Sciences Inst. * Acad. Dir., Found. for the Science of Reality
Staff, 4 Compuserve & AOL Forums * Owner, 3 EMail Lists * List Co-Moderator
Board of Dirs./Exec. V.P./Talent, Tektite Films * BBS Sysop (913/768-1113)
****************************************************************************
"The Prophets of God have been the Servants of Reality; Their Teachings
constitute the science of reality." - `Abdu'l-Baha
"The sciences of today are bridges to reality; if they lead not to reality,
naught remains but fruitless illusion." - `Abdu'l-Baha
From abtavangar@geoenv.comFri Mar 22 00:53:56 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:35:27 -0900
From: Alex Tavangar
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Dangerous Grounds
My Buddy, Pal, Bro:
Forget about the umbrella. That won't do at all. You had better wear hip
boots, mask, rubber hat and suit and then get in the middle of the ring and
be ready to sing: "It is a good day to die." Are you kidding, you call this
mud slinging? Is this an understatement or what?
I think anyone who enters the unholy grounds of Talisman should at once say,
"Hail TaliCzar, those who are about to die salute you!" Of course, a few
hundred prayers for frimness in the Covenant would not be bad insurance either.
Dear Seekers After Truth,
I'd like to ask for a personal favor from Talisdom. Every time a juicy
topic comes along (which is quite often) and I begin to soak in the ideas
and enjoy the discourse, I am slapped in the face with what I consider mud
slinging (however subtle). I really don't want to have to step inside this
forum every time with my umbrella open.
Example:
> I am baffled how as a social scientist Mark Foster has not been able to
>understand a very simple thing and how he has so far been able to justify
>his adamant position the way he has.
What followed the above statement was not enhanced by this opening.
(I left out the personal specifics on purpose as my intent is not personal)
Thanks,
Alex B. Tavangar
From mfoster@qni.comFri Mar 22 00:58:06 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 19:18:22 -0600
From: "Mark A. Foster"
To: Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
Alma -
You wrote:
>You speak of a "hail of scorn" for Mark. And there have been some
>negative comments about the way he presented Talisman to the UHJ.
>As you note, he had every right to present the matter to the House.
>But those Talismanians who thought there was misrepresentation also
>had every right to state that.
Sorry to harp on the subject, but I never posted my letter to the House of
Justice to this list. As far as I know, only myself and certain persons at
the World Centre have seen it. Therefore, I don't know what you mean by "the
way he presented Talisman to the UHJ."
To the Light,
Mark (Foster)
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduFri Mar 22 01:02:53 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 18:21:28 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: archives/ Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'
Hi,
re:
> From: Member1700@aol.com
> Date sent: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 15:30:49 -0500
> To: Talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ - Simply a Symbol of Baha'u'llah?
...snip
> Anyway, we have had endless discussions of this issue on Talisman,
> and--if you want several hours of reading material--we do have an archivist,
> Eric Pierce, who can provide you will all the juicy details. Eric?
> Warmest Naw-Ruz greetings,
> Tony
>
>From mid august 1995 until late september 1995, there at least 300
messages on or closely related to this topic. With "fat" email
header information included, the file containing the extracts of
these messages consists of:
29,079 lines

and is sized:
1,567,091 bytes.

The "zipped" (compressed) version is sized:
490,463 bytes.
I would estimate that at least 25% of the postings are of marginal
relevance and/or value.
The 300 messages included the multipart postings of the "Service of
Women" paper, and the letter from the Universal House of Justice to
New Zealand regarding the "Service" paper.
There are probably at least another 50-100 messages during the later
part of the fall 1995 period on the topic or related topics, but I
didn't have time to look further.
I can probably get my email software to jump through a few odd hoops
and get a "brief" list of the 300 messages email header info:
date/author/subject ...
for anyone that wants to narrow the search.
Drop me a private note if you want more info about these archives.
If you want to restrict distribution of any of your previous postings
on this topic, let me know.
Eric D. Pierce
(PierceED@csus.edu)
From Member1700@aol.comFri Mar 22 01:04:03 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:30:17 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Covenantal Issues
Dearest Alma:
I certainly appreciate your concerns about the damage that might be done
if we are to consider it legitimate and acceptable to throw accusations of
Covenant-breaking around on Talisman, or anywhere else in the Baha'i
community. It seems to me that your analysis of the difficulties with this
kind of talk is quite on the mark.
However, I very much doubt if anyone could use the recent statement of the
House of Justice to support a right to make such an accusation. The House
was rather careful in its wording concerning the right to raise issues of the
Covenant, and it seems to me that it was careful to focus any such discussion
on ideas, rather than individuals. The House writes:
> Thus, if any participant in an email discussion feels that a view put
>forward appears to contradict or undermine the provisions of the Covenant,
he
>should be free to say so, explaining candidly and courteously why he feels
>as he does. The person who made the initial statement will then be able to
>re-evaluate his opinion and, if he still believes it to be valid, he should
be
>able to explain why it is not contrary to either the letter or the spirit of
>the Covenant.
Of course, if anyone feels that an idea put forth by someone else is
precluded by the provisions of the Lesser Covenant, they they should have a
right to say so. As the House emphasizes this should be done courteously.
But, I think this is quite different than suggesting or implying that the
person offerring such ideas is actually a Covenant-breaker (or a
proto-Covenant-breaker, or a Covenant-breaker in the making, whatever). As
long as the discussion is focussed on the ideas being offerred, and one is
not questioning the motives or the sincerity of the speaker, one is certainly
within one's rights to raise the Covenant as an issue. And anyone is fully
within his rights to say why he feels that his views are fully within the
requirements of the Covenant (and the discussion will have to end there). It
seems to me that even Talismaniacs should be capable of this kind of
courteous exchange. After all, the Covenant is not a forbidden topic on
Talisman.
This is quite a different matter than an accusation of heresy, or a
statement that someone (as a person) is coming close to the edge of
Covenant-breaking. Such statements are indeed repugnant and are routinely
used within the Baha'i community to silence novel or unusual (or even new)
points of view. That is the kind of thing that I think is destructive, and
is clearly forbidden by the list rules.
Naw-Ruz greetings,
Tony
From alma@indirect.comFri Mar 22 01:04:30 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:09:04 -0700
From: Alma Engels
To: "Mark A. Foster" , Talisman
Subject: Re: Points of view
I apologize Mark for my imprecision. It would have been better if I had
said "based on the reply, the assumption of the way he...."
In peace,
Alma
At 07:18 PM 3/21/96 -0600, Mark A. Foster wrote:
>Alma -
>
>You wrote:
>>You speak of a "hail of scorn" for Mark. And there have been some
>>negative comments about the way he presented Talisman to the UHJ.
>>As you note, he had every right to present the matter to the House.
>>But those Talismanians who thought there was misrepresentation also
>>had every right to state that.
>
>Sorry to harp on the subject, but I never posted my letter to the House of
>Justice to this list. As far as I know, only myself and certain persons at
>the World Centre have seen it. Therefore, I don't know what you mean by "the
>way he presented Talisman to the UHJ."
>
>To the Light,
>
>Mark (Foster)
>
>
>
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
From burlb@bmi.netFri Mar 22 11:03:01 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 96 23:25 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Water Heater from Hell
Happy New Year to all of you...and welcome back Juan Cole!
Today Warner Brothers called and offered me some money to write a book
proposal for them. It was not much money, but the proposal is only 15 pages
and I have a week to produce the first draft and a month to provide the
final version. I say OK because I am desperate and I want them to like me.
I get up (they called when I was asleep so I faked the negotiations by
muttering like Marlon Brando while fluffing the pillow) and come downstairs
to clean my office for Naw Ruz -- the New Year harvesting of empty Coke cans
is a family tradition -- when suddenly: the water heater explodes! It was a
scene out of Exodus. "Will you pay the plumber before he leaves?" asks the
nice lady from Mike Harvey Plumbing. "Sure" says me, figuring I can keep the
plumber hostage for at least a week. No such luck. He replaces the entire
water heater and presents a bill -- due before sundown -- for exactly $24.91
*more* than Warner Brothers will be paying me for those 15 pages. I am in
the hole again. What is the spiritual message of this Naw Ruz adventure?
Why is God plotting against me? I already know he is the best of plotters --
I read that in the Qu'ran -- but what is the wisdom of the water heater
exploding? The basement being soaked? The Naw Ruz party being moved to
someone else's house? Is God mad at me because I want to know why the
German House of Worship looks like *that*? Isn't everything that happens
really all about me and my wants? Aren't I the center of the universe, the
star of at least the Lesser Plan or the Most Least Plan?
Burl
PS: UPS wouldn't take my tractor, hence I am retracting my re-traction.
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From iskandar@ns.moran.comFri Mar 22 11:04:20 1996
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 07:40:17 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: Covenantal Issues was Re[2]: Talisman as Comedy
Alma Engels to Talisman on 3/20/96:
----------
Richard, I have been thinking about bringing up the question of Covenantal
appropriateness of any post sent to email lists in general and to Talisman
in particular for a number of reasons. I realize that the recent letter
from the Universal House of Justice to David House indicates that this is
appropriate. So let me raise some questions here which others may care to
discuss. And let me refresh your minds with what I think is the relevant
portion of the House's reply to David:
> Thus, if any participant in an email discussion feels that a view put
>forward appears to contradict or undermine the provisions of the Covenant, he
>should be free to say so, explaining candidly and courteously why he feels
>as he does. The person who made the initial statement will then be able to
>re-evaluate his opinion and, if he still believes it to be valid, he should be
>able to explain why it is not contrary to either the letter or the spirit of
>the Covenant.
First of all in regard to Talisman. The following is a quote from a message
the list owner posts from time to time:
>5. The list owner being a Midwesterner of philosophic temperament,
>participants are requested to refrain from abusive language, discourtesy, ad
>hominem arguments, accusations of heresy, and other forms of fallacious
>argumentation.
It seems to me that Covenantal questions are included here under
"accusations of heresy". Now Talisman is a list for Baha'i interests. But
it is a secular list and not a Baha'i one. Does a Baha'i who is voluntarily
here have the right to override the apparent wishes of the list owner? Or
should that Baha'i if s/he is disturbed by what seems to her/him to be
questionable in regards to the Covenant simply remain publicly quiet or
resign from the list? Or perhaps that person could phrase his/her concerns
in a manner which does not question the firmness of the faith of the
original poster. In other words do we have the right to mold a list to our
own desires.
Me:
I do not buy this argument. There are quite a bit of posts on Talisman which are not directly related to the study of the Faith or its theology, etc. the posters have not been kicked out of the list (nor should they). The issue of the Covenant is an important issue and part and parcel of the Teachings.
Also, I believe, the advice from the House of Justice for friends to feel free to raise this issue transcends the purported list policy. I reserve my right to bring up the Covenant issue until the list owner decides to kick me out; I will then seek asylum on another list!
The point is not that you are here voluntarily and if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen; the point is that you may want to clarify a point, or correct an erroneous remark based on YOUR understanding of the Covenant.
Alma again:
More generally I am concerned that the letter from the House seems to place
the onus of proving ones 'orthodoxy' on the person making what seems to
someone a questionable statement. One must prove ones innocence rather than
having another prove one's quilt. This disturbs me greatly for a number of
reasons.
The first is this side tracks the original discussion and replaces it with
an irrelevant one and often the group's energies are diverted. And this MAY
be the intent of the questioning in the first place.
Me:
My reading of the message is that the House of Justice would wish to promote a dialogue which is open, free, and unencumbered. Because of the extreme importance and sensitivity of the Covenant issue, you may feel somewhat uncomfortable in bringing it up and let it go by ignoring it or whatever. I believe you should feel free to bring it up
Alma:
Secondly I wonder how one proves ones firmness in the Covenant any more than
how one can prove that one has stopped beating one's wife when in fact the
person never was beating his wife (or her husband -- this being the Faith of
equality of men and women. ;-) ).
Me:
I don't believe the House of Justice is implying that you should prove your firmness in the Covenant.
If you make a post that I find to be against the Covenant (using MY understanding), you may explain your post so I gain a better and broader understanding of the issue, or just refer me to whatever text you have in mind, etc. I do not believe you can prove your firmness in the Covenant to yourself or to anyone else because you can break the Covenant any time no matter who you are. It happened to the brother and to the son of Baha'u'llah; it can happen to you and me too.
Alma:
Thirdly, I think that questioning one's firmness in the Covenant is
sometimes used (and I don't mean to imply that this is the case on Talisman)
to silence someone or at least make that person cease presenting
controversial points of view.
Me:
That may very well be true and is very unfortunate indeed. I wish to reserve my right to bring up the Covenantal aspect of an issue, even when some (or many) have misused or abused it.
Also, sometimes when you defend a Baha'I Institution, for example, you may be branded as a fundamentalist or fascist or whatever (like what Mark Foster mentioned on another thread) which hurts just as bad as when you imply violation of the Covenant to someone.
Alma:
Fourthly, this sort of questioning tends to make the group more cautious in
a visible manner in statements in that many then seem to see a necessity of
affirming respect for the Institutions, firmness in the Covenant, etc.,
explicitely rather than allowing it to be assumed that this is the case
because that person is a declared Baha'i who gives all appearances of living
a Baha'i life to the best of his/her ability.
And finally and most importantly, such questioning of the "Baha'iness" of
another believer is all to often brought to the attention of some portion of
the Administrative Order for action by the Administrative Order. And many
times it is a frivilous charge which will not hold up. I speak from
experience here for such happened to me late summer of last year. And the
effect can be devastating even when in the end one is cleared as I was.
Moreover, when this happens because of email, the conveying of the charges
may not be done discretely. In my case it involved subjecting me to the
inspection of people in Florida before the charges reached my LSA and ABM
for Protection in Arizona. Since I had no way of retracing the route to
Florida, my reputation there is probably still compromised. It is true that
we must face tests and that we grow them -- I have changed -- but where
does it say that Baha'is should be the deliberate source of tests for other
Baha'is?
Me:
Just as important it is not play fast and loose with the Covenant nor with the dignity and reputation of individual Baha'is, it is equally important to be meticulous and as clear as possible about your point of view when you post a message about the Teachings, the history of the Faith, its Central Figures, its Institutions, etc.
Let me close by a verse from the Aqdas (paragraph 178):
This is not a Cause which may be made a plaything for idle fancies, nor is it a field for the foolish and faint of hear....
Alma:
This might not be so important if it were a rare happening in the Baha'i
community -- at least the American one. But it is not. I am constantly
amazed when I find a fellow Baha'i who has had a similar exerience. The
latest occurence was when I forwarded David Langness' letter to someone who
had been on Talisman until recently and was aware of David's retraction. I
wanted him/her to have a complete picture. And found when this person
replied to me that she/he had also been tested by someone in the AO.
In peace,
Alma
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
Me:
Happy Naw-Ruz
Iskandar Hai
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduFri Mar 22 15:32:47 1996
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 12:01:28 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: Women on UHJ
Dear John, I did not mean to imply that Talisman was suffering from
boredom from this topic. I only meant that we have already covered a
good deal of turf here and, as Sen indicated, it really is impossible for
us to get any closure on the subject. Many of the messages were very
worthwhile, indicating that the issue is more ambiguous than many imagine
it to be. I don't remember the idea being put forth before that 9
beautiful teenage girls should be serving as House members, but there
were other equally provocative statements being made.
Dear Stephen, may I suggest that you delete all messages from Derek and
Burl before you read them. One of the burdens of Talisman is that we are
subjected to their lies and half truths and my phlegmatic, Midwestern
husband refuses to take any action against them, in spite of the fact
that his own wife is so often their target. I can't understand it.
Dear Eric, if Burl's house really flooded, perhaps we don't have to be so
concerned with the bathing issue. I only hope his daughter threw him a
bar of soap. Linda
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comFri Mar 22 15:33:15 1996
Date: 22 Mar 96 13:21:25 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Actors of capacity
Dear Talismanians,
I, too, am a fan of Ben Kingsley's fine and versatile work. And although
I generally refrain from mentioning such things here in Hollywoodland, Ben
is a good friend to a local Baha'i actress and has been attending a fireside
or two here lately. A few prayers for his search might be in order.
Love,
David
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comSat Mar 23 11:21:54 1996
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 96 14:22:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: ahriazati@ccgate.hac.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Sources -UPDATED
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Beloved Habib,
Thank you so very kindly on your welcomed corrections/additions.
Your efforts are deeply valued and appreciated.
Since now there are several folks on Talisman looking at various
volumes of INBAMCs for different interests, we ought to keep in
close contact and periodically update each other. Assuming Juan
Cole as listowner has no objection, perhaps Tarjuman is a more
appropriate forum for this sort of discussion.

Your caution in use of these materials is well taken and is one that
one must keep in mind with any manuscript. But I think that
generally folks dealing with this sort of documents are
sophisticated enough to apply good judgment. Actually, I'm a firm
believer in having multiple copies of the same Tablet or Work for
comparative purposes. I think its always very instructive to
compare different versions to see what has changed. Often the
variations is no more than copyist error; but not necessarily
always. I'm reminded of the good work that Chris Buck has done on
Iqan in tracing the changes authorized (presumably) by Baha'u'llah
on the Text. Now, average Joe Baha'i may not care very much about
this sorts of discussion and just be happy to read and benefit from
the published version, but for a researcher (like Buck), the
variations maybe very telling.
The sort of project that you're heading, namely, developing a
database of the Writings in the original languages, is indeed a very
important step in providing access to Tablets. However, I don't
think it can eliminate the need for access to manuscripts too, as
invariably some researcher wishes to assemble all variations among
copies of a certain Tablet s/he is working on. As such its of
paramount importance for him/her to correlate *all* manuscripts
containing the Text he is researching. Incidentally, I was told
that through such close comparison of Tablets, a second Surih-i
Haykal by Baha'u'llah was identified recently -- I don't know any
details though.
On a different topic, I know that many of us are eager to hear
progress on computerization of the Texts, so if there is a project
update to share, I'm sure many of the friends would appreciate
seeing it posted.
Hope to hear your learned voice on Talisman more often.
with much love and a belated happy Naw-Ruz, ahang.
From cenglish@aztec.asu.eduSat Mar 23 11:24:19 1996
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 17:11:22 -0700 (MST)
From: "THOMAS C. ENGLISH"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: A self intro by a new subscriber
An intro for Talisman based on Maori tradition?
If that's what it takes to subscribe to *this* list.
My name is Chris English.

|||
>0-0<
~V~
""' '""
(tongue out and wiggling)

I have no tatoos on my face or any other parts of my
body - yet. My present homeland is pleasant in winter and
very warm in summer. My present home looks like 100,000
other homes in the Salt River Valley of Arizona. When I
moved here eight years ago it took me two months to learn
how to get straight home.
I am unique. One has to meet me only about one dozen times to
remember who I am. A friend of mine, Eric, told me about
this list. I subscribed once and left because I am not a
particularly verbose person, my hard drive and time resources
are limited, and, given a bag full of hair I'd rather find
a way to use it putting the hairs together rather than splitting
them. Many people find me boring, some claim I keep them from
going brain-dead, some claim I am brain-dead.
Since this is a Maori-type intro, tradition insists I
recite some ancestors. I am a husband and father. Parts
of my family have lived in what we call the USA at least
15 generations. Parts of my wife's family met them on
the beach, waving codfish, lobsters, or most likely,
throwing rocks. I am not directly descended from anyone
whose name is in history books.
Mention of some family members make historians in rural
backwaters open their notebooks to me. Distant
cemeteries are loaded with five to ten generations of
cousin's bones; my forebears are buried in new locations
nearly every generation. My barely-teenage child already
yearns to travel from the first to the last inch of highways.
Some moments I think it should be the Pan-American. Starting
instantly.
Some ancestors spoke up for displaced American Indians.
Some sheltered former slaves. One proclaimed the right
to female suffrage. One protested events involving the
dropping of large amounts of high explosives into small
Asian villages. Most have just done what those around
them did.
At parties or big meetings, I'm a quiet person moving
around the edges, keeping to myself. It takes me a
long time to know people. I'd probably not be married
if my wife and I were not introduced by a Persian
matchmaker. I'll do the same on this list, sitting in
back, watching and listening to the talkers, bursting
out with a wisecrack if I think I can slip a bit
of corny humor in, serious only when warranted.
That's me, you're welcome to my Marai, just introduce
yourself properly first. Kai's on the stove.
--
Wisdom without science cannot fully know the meaning of the
created and material cosmos. Science without wisdom leaves humans
enslaved to a world of unrelated objects where order and
significance in human existence cannot be discovered. - T. Merton
From Ruhi19@aol.comSat Mar 23 11:25:10 1996
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 09:25:25 -0500
From: Ruhi19@aol.com
To: 73043.1540@compuserve.com, TALISMAN@indiana.edu
Cc: science-of-reality@listserv.aol.com, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us,
peter.conn@mci.com, cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.edu, rglosso@siue.edu,
VMCCRAE@aol.com, iolson@mitre.org
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ , 2
>>I wonder why the
person at the World Center who was interviewed by the journalist simply
didn't
say so, instead of talking about it in terms of "divine wisdom" and
"exceptions".<<
The interviewee may have been thinking about this quote from Abdu'l-Baha:
"The House of Justice, however, according to the explicit text of the Law of
God, is confined to men; this for a wisdom of the Lord God's, which will ere
long be made manifest as clearly as the sun at high noon." (Selections from
the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p 79-80)
Another quote which has shaped my opinion is this one: "But there are
certain matters, the participation in which is not worthy of women. For
example, at the time when the community is taking up vigorous defensive
measures against the attack of foes, the women are exempt from military
engagement....under such a circumstance defense is necessary, but it is the
duty of men to organize and execute such defensive measures and not the
women--because their hearts are tender and they cannot endure the sight of
the horror of carnage, even if it is for the sake of defense. From such and
similar undertakings the women are exempt." (Compilations, p. 367, #2114)
This does not mean that "either sex is inferior or superior to the other, or
that they are unequal in their rights." (Compilation, p. 370, #2119)
Consider this: Our supreme institution is called a House of Justice. It is
not a house of mercy. Think of the different ways that men and women
discipline children. Most often it is the men who believe that the children
need punishment of some kind when they have done wrong. It is the women who
must overcome an inclination to forgive and show mercy to the child.
"Woman by nature is opposed to war; she is an advocate of peace...Therefore
as woman advances toward the degree of man in power and privilege, with the
right of vote and control in human government, most assuredly war will cease;
for women is naturally the most devoted and staunch advocate of international
peace." (Abdul-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 375)
The balancing of the equality of men and women with the exemption for women
in serving on the Universal House of Justice is difficult and we will
undoubtedly be discussing it for some time until it is "evident as the
noonday sun".
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduSat Mar 23 11:25:33 1996
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 23:55:11 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: true seeker...
I was at a teaching meeting tonight where the discussion evolved
around the subject of the condition of a true seeker. It was alluded
that
the following statement was addressed to the clergy. I question it.
"When a true seeker determines to take step of search in the path
leading to the knowledge of the Ancient of Days, he must first purify
his heart, which is the seat of the revelation of the inner
mysterious of God, from the obscuring dust of all acquired knowledge,
and the allusions of the embodiments of satanic fancy" Kitab'i Iqan
po. 192 (i.e. the clergy and preachers) [emphasis supplied by the
speaker].
My response to this statement by the speaker was, that there is
nothing in the above quote which is directed to the clergy only.
For, "satanic fancy" could apply to anyone's insistence of their POV
regarding any subject matter, especially religion. Also, I indicated
that this type of construction of reality regarding Faith is in
direct opposition to the Teachings which are the oneness of religion,
God and humanity. Any insights on this subject is appreciated.
love,
q.
**************************************************************************
A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole
planet, freed from national hinderances and restrictions, and functioning
with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity.-Shoghi Effendi, 1936
From cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.eduSat Mar 23 11:27:38 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 01:45:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand
To: Ruhi19@aol.com
Cc: 73043.1540@compuserve.com, TALISMAN@indiana.edu,
science-of-reality@listserv.aol.com, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us,
peter.conn@mci.com, rglosso@siue.edu, VMCCRAE@aol.com, iolson@mitre.org
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ , 2
Dear Friends, if i may ....
As a woman, i was never 'disturbed' by this law about the membership on
the UHJ. In the Writings, we are told to investigate the truth, and not
believe things on blind faith but to question and come to our own
understanding of the wisdom of the teachings especially those that need
extra pondering such as this one. So, i did and very quickly realized the
wisdom of this law. (i won't go into it as these reasons were
satisfactory to me and might not be to someone else)
Anyway, a few years ago, Ruhiyyih Khanum was in Toronto and someone asked
about this and she said many many interesting and good things which made
a very cogent answer but one of the things that really stoood out in my
mind was the idea of AUTHORITY, POWER, HIERARCHY etc. which are
realities of the world which have completely different meanings in the
Baha'i Faith and community.
What Ruhiyyih Khanum pointed out was that many people are disturbed by
this law because of their notions of a hierarchy of power and authority
which is dominant in the world and the status and privileges and rights
that are given to those in such positions of authority. In the Baha'i
community the administrative order is structured in such a way that
although there is a perceived authority structure which is based on one
body being 'higher' than the other, there really is not a difference as
each of these bodies are made up of individuals who areserving. (is this
making sense, i am not sure if i am expressing myself coherently)
WHat she was implying was that being on the UHJ does not mean that you
are in a higher position and therefore women are deprived of the
opportunity to serve on the 'highest' decision making body. THe
administrative order funcitons as a body with each organ serving a
purpose to maintain order. And if the point is service, we can all do
that in any way we feel inclined to.
the other point which was really well addressed was the concern on the
part of some women that their interests are not served if they are not
represented. THis is often the case in the world today. We see how
government policies relating to women differ when you look at the number
of women on the government (iie. US and Sweden) Well, here is the other
difference, because of the consultation mechanism, although the members
of the UHJ are all men, the interests of women are never undermined.
i am sorry i was not able to express my thoughts well but i think you can
get the jist of what i was trying to say,
in peace,
cheshmak
From Ruhi19@aol.comSat Mar 23 11:28:24 1996
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 09:26:02 -0500
From: Ruhi19@aol.com
To: 73043.1540@compuserve.com, TALISMAN@indiana.edu
Cc: science-of-reality@listserv.aol.com, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us,
peter.conn@mci.com, cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.edu, rglosso@siue.edu,
VMCCRAE@aol.com, iolson@mitre.org
Subject: Re: The Gender of the UHJ
In a message dated 96-03-20 23:34:59 EST, 73043.1540@compuserve.com (John
Dale) writes:
> I know that a lot of discussion has flowed over this issue in the past,
>so my questions are: (1) is there an archive of this discussion? (2) if
not,
>can someone summarize the best thinking we currently have on this topic?
>
>
This is indeed a topic which has come up before and will again. My own
opinions have been shaped by the Compilation on Women put out by the
Universal House of Justice and "Baha'i Marriage and Family Life" compiled by
the National Spiritual Assembly of Canada. The best at explaining the
stations of men and women, in my opinion, is a letter from the Universal
House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of New Zealand in
December 1980. It is quite lengthy and is #183 on page 57 of "Baha'i
Marriage and Family Life" and in the Compilation of Complications, Vol II, pg
385, #2162 (Women). For those of you who don't have access to it, it says in
part:
"The House of Justic suggests that all statements in the Holy Writings
concerning specific areas of the relationship between men and women should be
considered in the light of the general principle of equality between the
sexes that has been authoritatively and repeatedly enunciated in the Sacred
Texts. In one of His Tablets 'Abdu'l-Baha asserts: 'In this divine age the
bounties of God have encompassed the world of women. Equality of men and
women, except in some negligible instances, has been fully and categorically
announced. Distinctions have been utterly removed.' That men and women
differ from one another in certain characteristics and functions is an
inescapable fact of nature; the important thing is that 'Abdu'l-Baha regards
such inequalities as remain between the sexes as being 'negligible'.

"....the Faith is intended to strengthen the family, not weaken it, and one
of the keys to the strengthening the family...The atmosphere within a Baha'i
family as within the community as a whole should express 'the keynote of the
Cause of God' which is...humble fellowship, not arbitrary power, but the
spirit of frank and loving consultation.'
"A family, however, is a very special kind of 'community'. The Research
Department has not come across any statements which specifically name the
father as responsible for the 'security, progress and unity of the
family'...but it can be inferred from a number of the responsibilities placed
upon him, that the father can be regarded as the 'head' of the family. The
members of a family all have duties and responsibilities towards one another
and to the family as a whole, and these duties and responssibilities vary
from member to member because of their natural relationships. The parents
have the inescapable duty to educate their children--but not vice versa; the
children have the duty to obey their parents--the parents do not obey the
children; the mother--not the father--bears the children, nurses them in
babyhood, and is thus their first educator, hence daughters have a prior
right to education over sons and, as the Guardian's secretary has written on
his behalf, 'The task of bringing up a Baha'i child, as emphasized time and
again in Baha'i Writings, is the chief responsibility of the mother....The
training which the child first receives through his mother constitutes the
strongest foundation for his future development.' A corollary of this
responsibility of the mother is her right to be supported by her husband--a
husband has no explicit right to be supported by his wife....'
"...These are all relationships within the family, but there is a much wider
sphere of relationship between men and women than in the home and this too we
should consider in the context of Baha'i society, not in that of past or
present social norms. For example, although the mother is the first educator
of the child, ...the father also has the responsibility of educating his
children, and this responsibility is so weighty that Baha'u'llah has stated
that a father who fails to exercise it forfeits his rights of fatherhood.
Similarly, although the primary responsibility for supporting the family
financially is placed upon the husband, this does not by any means imp0ly
that the place of women is confined to the home. On the contrary,
'Abdul-Baha' has stated: 'In this Revelation of Baha'u'llah, the women go
neck and neck with men. In no movement will they be left behind. Their
rights with men are equal in degree...(Paris Talks, p. 182)"
(See next message for part 2)

From jwinters@epas.utoronto.caSat Mar 23 11:29:06 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 02:07:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: Sources for Martyrdom
Greetings. No, I'm not seeking how-to advice! I'm getting ready to
start my master's thesis, and seek research suggestions.
I propose to examine the theme of martyrdom through the Shi'i,
Babi, and Baha'i religions and trace the continuities and
discontinuities. Most of the Shi'i sources I can find from library
catalogues, but I need suggestions on the Babi-Baha'i stuff. I think that
much, or most, of my material will be from unpublished dissertations. (My
comprehension of Arabic and Persian will still be minimal by that time.)
Before I order any dissertation that sounds interesting, such as
Amanat's, Lawson's, Rafati's, or MacEoin's two, does anyone have any
pointers?
Thanks, -J
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comSat Mar 23 11:30:01 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 96 07:54:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Sources for Martyrdom
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Dear Jonah,
As you're looking for unpublished dissertations on this subject,
you may want to check out:
"A Psychological Theory of Martyrdom: a content analysis of
personal documents of Baha'i martyrs of Iran written between 1979
and 1982". Fereshteh Taheri Bethel. San Diego, Calif. United
States International University, 1984. 262 pages.
best wishes, ahang.
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduSat Mar 23 11:32:51 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 11:10:47 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu, Burl Barer
Subject: Re: true seeker...
Quanta Said regarding the True Seeker:
"My response to this statement by the speaker was, that there is
nothing in the above quote which is directed to the clergy only."
>Burl agrees and wants to know why the speaker said otherwise.
Hello BB,
After much concerted effort to duplicate the essence of
my simpleton friends (not that I am not), it is going to be difficult
to shift gears of my cerebral cortex and have a thoughtful
dialogue with you. But, I shall try.
The much beloved doctor (shrink) in our community gave a
wonderful fireside on the subject of "Reality of Truth" (or, something like
that and I thought they meant the same thing, actually) where I
invited a seeker and there was another one there as well.
After listening a few minutes to the talk, I had to interrupt (now
you see why I don't like going to firesides anymore). I was feeling
the uneasiness of the seekers. Later my concern was validated by one.
The reason for interruption was twofold.
1- I kept examining very carefully the faces of the seekers and
"believers?". The seeker looked a bit lost, the "believers" kept on
nodding and agreeing with smiles and sounds to the idea that the
reason that the lay-people were having a hard time accepting the Faith is because
of their clergy, their lack of detachment from their church
activities, their fear of losing the chance to go to heaven, their
racial, cultural and religious prejudices etc. etc. etc.
2-The reason the clergy was not accepting the Faith is because of
their position of control and their dependency on their salaries as
preachers and ministers and priests.
I thought to myself "if that's so, why even bother to try teaching
people?"
I said to the revered doctor "the reasons you are listing, for people's
lack of interest in the Faith are somewhat, conditionally and partially valid.
However,I am not so sure if clergy is "the
embodiments of satanic fancy. Isn't true that satan is the "insisting
self according to Abdu'l'Baha? Thus, you and me any Baha'i can also
be satanic, huh?". If these are the only reasons for people's lack of interest,
then there should not be any Baha'i in the world. How is it that in spite of the
conditions that you are stating there are a few million people most
of whom have accepted the Faith on their own volition? Isn't true
that Baha'i Faith stands for religious, racial and Divine Unity? How
can we teach Unity from the premises of divisions? Is this a good way
opening the hearts of people to the concepts of Unity?". Then, later
in a private conversation I told him "Doc, you are a psychiatrist
right? Now, let us say that you are here trying to make people look
healthy and beautiful. Would you start by telling them how ugly and
sick they are? Put their homes, their
families, their teachers down? Then, ask them to use your methods to
health and beauty? As a mind expert, I'm asking you how would they
feel?" He said that was not his intention at all. I believe him. But,??
I asked the beloved doctor of the copy of his prepared speech and he
gave it to me. Unfortunately I don't have with me in the lab this morning.
But, I posted part of it last night where he clearly in parantheses wrote
that he meant clergy. He is a very fine, kind and gentle person and
I really like him and we parted in a very good terms after the talk.
I also said to him that what we are doing is blaming the whole world
for not listening to His Words, and not accepting some responsibility
ourselves individually and collectively for the conditions in the
world. We are so caught in the web of this world ourselves and can't
get out of the tangle and blame the world for our own failures in
teaching and living in a way that their nostrils smell the fragrances
of the Divine Words and they feel drawn to our communities.
Now, why am I sharing this with you on talisman? I think each
situation can be a helpful tool for the improvement of the greater
community. That's why statisticians are making a big these days.
Call it poll taking and extrapolate this experience to figure out the
big picture for yourselves.
BB, did this help to clarify things for you a little bit?? I hope so.
love,
q.
p.s. I am in the lab on Saturdays 10 a.m.- 4 p.m. and Sundays
12-8 p.m. and would love to engage in a dialogue with anyone.
**************************************************************************
A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole
planet, freed from national hinderances and restrictions, and functioning
with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity.-Shoghi Effendi, 1936
From 0007368608@mcimail.comSat Mar 23 17:52:23 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 96 15:29 EST
From: Dariush Lamie <0007368608@mcimail.com>
To: "talisman@indiana.edu"
Subject: Re. Women & UHJ
-- [ From: Dariush Lamie * EMC.Ver #2.3 ] --
When we talk about equal rights; I think that we have to distinguish between
two concepts, one is the rights and second the duty and function; I would look
at the issue of membership of the UHJ as a duty rather than a right. By duty, I
mean *service to the Cause of God* is a duty and not a right that a segment of
the society (women) were exempted.
Also, when we look at the issue of *equality of rights*, we have to keep in
mind that Baha'u'llah's intention was to eliminate the *social injustices* that
were conferred upon women in the past/present and in my inadequate and limited
knowledge of the Writings, I found no reference in any of our Writings that
there were a mention 100% equality of rights, to support that I would like to
mention the following statement of Abdu'i Baha:
"In this divine age the bounties of God have encompassed
the world of
women. Equality of men and women, *except in some
negligible*
instances, has been fully and categorically announced."
With warmest regards,
Dariush
From jwinters@epas.utoronto.caSat Mar 23 23:28:30 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 19:48:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: talisman
Subject: Long hair on men
OK, I'll admit in advance, this is about as far from being
relevant to anything of importance as can be. Before I pose my question,
here's the quote, Kitab-i Aqdas para. 44:
"Shave not your heads; God hath adorned them with hair, and in this there
are signs from the Lord of creation to those who reflect upon the
requirements of nature. He, verily, is the God of strength and wisdom.
Notwithstanding, it is not seemly to let the hair pass beyond the limit of
the ears. Thus hath it been decreed by Him Who is the Lord of all
worlds."
As a long-haired man assured by many women that long haired
men, to them, are anything but unseemly, I seek insights. The best
explanation I've heard yet is that perhaps this refers to the Hasidim;
why else would He have said "beyond the ears"?
Any ideas? -J
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comSat Mar 23 23:29:29 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 20:22:08 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Fwd: Long hair on men
-
OK, I'll admit in advance, this is about as far from being
relevant to anything of importance as can be. Before I pose my
question,
here's the quote, Kitab-i Aqdas para. 44:
"Shave not your heads; God hath adorned them with hair, and in this
there
are signs from the Lord of creation to those who reflect upon the
requirements of nature. He, verily, is the God of strength and wisdom.
Notwithstanding, it is not seemly to let the hair pass beyond the limit
of
the ears. Thus hath it been decreed by Him Who is the Lord of all
worlds."
As a long-haired man assured by many women that long haired
men, to them, are anything but unseemly, I seek insights. The best
explanation I've heard yet is that perhaps this refers to the Hasidim;
why else would He have said "beyond the ears"?
Any ideas? -J
My dear Jonah
Echos of the early sixities you invoke with this idea.Short back and
sides was regarded then as the Baha'i way.Any hair even approaching the
ear was heresy my dear Sir.Burn the brigand at the stake and other such
loving comments.Well take a look at the example of the Master and
notice two things his hair is long but the ears are not covered by the
hair but swept behind.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
PS My dear friend Naysan Faizi
Australian NSA God help them> pointed this out to his father Hand of
the Cause Faizi as to why his hair which was short in Naysan's opinion,
should be allowed to grow long as the example of the Master.The
response was a classic , "Well you become like Abdu'l-Baha and you can
grow your hair as long as you like.But until that day comes get your
hair cut."
From Wilgar123@aol.comSun Mar 24 12:13:25 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 23:27:31 -0500
From: Wilgar123@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: infallibility
Dear Friends,
I am interested in people's thoughts about the notion of infallibility. I,
for one, have an extremely difficult time speaking of ontological
infallibility as relating to anything other than God, as, from my point of
view, only God is omniscient, and omniscience is a necessary prerequisite, so
to speak, of ontological infallibility. I have an easier time with what I
would term relational or relative infallibility whereby for the purpose of
legitimizing socio-political authority a community recognizes through a
Compact or Covenant a binding allegiance to a person or institution. I am
also interested in others' views as to why there is a need to believe in
ontologically infallible individuals or institutions. Can we not accept that
to err is the nature of creation at all levels, and that what matters most is
not that we are "correct" but that we act with honesty, integrity, humility,
compassion and good faith?
Love and laughter,
Bill G
P>S> If these topics have already been covered (which they probably have) I
ask
for you indulgence. This is the price old timers have to pay for having new
subscribers.

From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlSun Mar 24 12:14:39 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 09:37:00 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: from Sonja: Laity & Joseph Beuys
FROM SONJA
Alma thanks for a wonderful posting re: style/tone of postings on
Talisman.
Here's my take on the laity issue.
Joseph Beuys (German performance/fluxus/'social' artist who died in
1986) said during a lecture in '74 in New York that,
"The ego must be developed, not for its own sake, but because it is
needed by society. If you are only interested in self-realization then you
cannot make a good painting. To do this you have to have thought
about forming and about how ideas of forming stem from history."
So my take is, of course there are experts in the Bahai Faith (scholars
or learned) just like you are experts in any field and it would
impoverish our Faith to ignore these or to expect 'experts' to always
work at a level that a lay-person could relate to.
Sometimes (not often though) Bahais ask me why I don't exhibit say at
Bahai events or under a Bahai framework, etc.
In general I don't because my work is too specialized (not to say it is
'better') but it uses and works in a language that a lay-person (ie
someone more or less ignorant of anything to do with art) would find
incomprehensible. And I am not working for the lay-person. If I was I'd
still be making realistic still-lifes (I did this when I was 16!).
Rather I am using my art as a vehicle - like I would say scholars use
their particular fields - as a vehicle for saying something rich or 'deep',
dare I say profound, or perhaps complex - about the world.
As Beuys has expressed, society needs developed egos, and I'd argue
that is what any culture is created from. Surely we are concerned with
the richness of life rather than only the common denominator.
It's the diverse flowers that are so interesting not the ones that are the
same. And we should listen and respect experts because we might (and
do) learn something, which doesn't mean agreeing with them.
your not-so-'umble artist,
Sonja
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonja van Kerkhoff ph: 31-43-3216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht,
The Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From jwalbrid@indiana.eduSun Mar 24 12:15:11 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 08:30:07 -0500 (EST)
From: jwalbrid
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Long hairs and ear lobes
The meaning of this verse is not clear, as far as I know. My old Aqdas
teacher (Vahid Rafati) had no explanation for it, which tells me that the
Persian Baha'i tradition did not have a standard explanation. I do
recall that Browne comments on the Baha'i men in Akka in the 1880s
wearing their hair pulled back behind their ears and then cut off in the
back at roughly the level of the ear lobe.

If there is a cultural reference to this verse, it is probably that the
Shi'ite ulama tended to shave their heads and dervishes wore theirs long,
I think.

john walbridge
From a003@lehigh.eduSun Mar 24 12:15:36 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 09:28:37 EST
From: a003@lehigh.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The Universal House Of Justice, Men, & Secret Socieities
Dear friends:
An interesting tidbit which may not have been touched on in the endless
discussion about the House and it's all male membership.
Recently, in reviewing Joseph Campbell's discussion of why men form secret
societies and go through painful rituals that often shed blood, it became
clear to me that the form of the Universal House of Justice (i.e. its all
male membership and its quality of exclusiveness and secret connection to
spiritual power--and please allow me latitude here in my expression, this
does not mean that the beloved House is secret or exclusive, yet it can
easily be seen this way), was an organic extension of
social/sexual/spiritual behavior that emanates from the fundamental nature
of humankind.
To be brief, women were "happy" to have the men go off and do their thing
as they were concerned that the men would create dissonance or "hurt"
their profound power, which is directly related to menstrual blood, and
their connection to the cycles of the moon, the universe.
Men often caused pain to one another in these societies as a means of
creating the bonding relationship and to mimic the bleeding that was
already organically a part of woman's spiritual heritage. Men need such
societies in order to complete themselves spiritually. That's why the
Universal House of Justice is all men.
Just a thought.
With love and best regards,
Bill
*-----------------------------------------------------------*
* Phone:610-867-9251 William George *
* Theatre Artist *
* 908 E. 5th. St. *
* Bethlehem, Pa 18015 U.S.A. *
*___________________________________________________________*
From cfarhoum@osf1.gmu.eduSun Mar 24 12:36:29 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:07:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheshmak A Farhoumand
To: Dariush Lamie <0007368608@mcimail.com>
Cc: "talisman@indiana.edu"
Subject: Re: Re. Women & UHJ
Dear Dariush, you have made an important distinction between rights and
duty. The quote you cite of Abdu'l Baha is an interesting one in that i
have always read it to mean that there is another distinction to be made,
that of equality and equity (very different things) and one of rights and
roles. i believe in this revelation, we men and women are given equal
rights and opportunities but that goes hand in hand with the
understanding that we have different roles, and functions in society.
regards,
cheshmak
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlMon Mar 25 10:43:30 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 20:34:42 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: from Sonja: women and UHJ
Dear Dariush,
What about women having an equal opportunity to serve or for duty?
And I would hardly call serving on the highest Bahai institution a negliable
difference.
regards, Sonja.
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comThu Mar 21 10:24:48 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 07:37:43 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Fwd: RE: Insecure Scholars?
---- Begin Forwarded Message
I typically don't post "thank you" notes, but in case of Nima's
comments, I'm blown away by the excellence of his cogent remarks!
And once again, I stand humbled by his example of clarity of
thoughts and courage -- and for the record, I second every single
word he said.
Let me suggest that we give this thread a rest, however, as I see
no good coming out of calling each insecure, or worse, suggesting
questionable Covenantal comments, particularly when we all know
who the real target of all such accusations is and he's presently
away and not here to speak up. All of this talk about "insecure"
this or that has the smell of backbiting to me, so let's not
engage in it in this season of joy and felicity.
Happy Naw-Ruz to all.
best wishes, ahang.
My dear Nima and Ahang
I believe you are both refering to our dear friend Juan Cole.I do not
think for one moment anybody on this particular thread was considoring
him. My sole purpose was to point out the double standard that unfolded
because Mark Foster has written to the House and then posted the reply
on the 'Elite/Laity' issue.The outraged cries because he had dared to
write to the House I found objectionable.It is as I have often stated
time to put behind us the infantile insults that refer to the Covenant
and attempts to divided up the community into various segments, such as
Liberals/Conservatives and the latests Calvinists. The religious
concepts of John Calvin which include predestination, total depravity
and limited atonement are about as far as one can get from the Faith of
the Blessed Beauty and as an unworthy a comment as someone accusing
another of being a covenant-breaker.Name calling should form no part of
this list in my view and demean us all.
That said I hope and pray the New Year will be filled with Joy and Love
for all, and soon we will see with our outer and inner eyes the
unfoldment of the New Day of God to all His Peoples.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From CaryER_ms@msn.comThu Mar 21 10:34:35 1996
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 96 18:23:17 UT
From: "Hannah E. Reinstein"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, Ahang Rabbani
Subject: RE: Insecure Scholars?
Chiming in....
I'm sorry to take bandwidth on a simple reply but I feel a need to say that
Nima's post was brilliant, beautiful, and true.
It's wearying and depressing to see the big "C" word popup now and then in a
negative and wholly inappropriate way. Let's all be aware of that this year
and leave mud-slinging to the sad, socially misfit usenet subculture. For
Heaven's sake, as Ahang says, let's give it a rest. It has no place here.
Warmly,
H/C
----------
From: owner-talisman@indiana.edu on behalf of Ahang Rabbani
Sent: Wednesday, 20 March, 1996 3:50 AM
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Insecure Scholars?
I typically don't post "thank you" notes, but in case of Nima's
comments, I'm blown away by the excellence of his cogent remarks!
And once again, I stand humbled by his example of clarity of
thoughts and courage -- and for the record, I second every single
word he said.
Let me suggest that we give this thread a rest, however, as I see
no good coming out of calling each insecure, or worse, suggesting
questionable Covenantal comments, particularly when we all know
who the real target of all such accusations is and he's presently
away and not here to speak up. All of this talk about "insecure"
this or that has the smell of backbiting to me, so let's not
engage in it in this season of joy and felicity.
Happy Naw-Ruz to all.
best wishes, ahang.
From jrcole@umich.eduMon Mar 25 10:39:06 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 12:36:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: Cheshmak A Farhoumand
Cc: Dariush Lamie <0007368608@mcimail.com>,
"talisman@indiana.edu"
Subject: Re: Re. Women & UHJ
Our beloved brother Dariush is so dear to me, and his insights so
precious, that I equivocated about replying to his proposal that we see
elective service on the Universal House of Justice as something other
than a "right" as a way of understanding how women might be excluded from
it yet still have equal rights with men.
The issue is important enough, however, that it seemed to me incumbent to
point out that the beloved Guardian did refer to elective service on
Baha'i institutions as a "right," and, indeed, spoke of Iranian Baha'i
women who were admitted to eligibility for service on the Iranian NSA in
the early 1950s as being finally able to exercise their "right" to serve
on the NSA. I am unable to find a logical way to see NSA service as a
right but service on the Universal House of Justice as a duty or
privilege or some other legal category.
I enclose a posting I did from last September that reviews the language
of the Writings with regard to women, rights, and service on Baha'i
institutions.
cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan
Let me throw some further textual evidence into the debate:
On equality of rights for all under the law as a Baha'i principle:
Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, p. 11:
"safeguard the rights of the downtrodden, and punish the wrong-
doers."
Tablets of Baha'u'llah revealed after the Kitab-i-Aqdas, p. 70:
"They that perpetrate tyranny in the world have usurped the
rights of the peoples and kindreds of the earth . . ."
A Traveller's Narrative, `Abdu'l-Baha, p. 91:
"the establishment of the uniform political rights of diverse
nationalities"
Paris Talks, `Abdu'l-Baha, p. 133:
"Women have equal rights with men upon earth . . ."
p. 154:
"prince, peer and peasant alike have equal rights to just treatment . . ."
p. 161:
"the female sex is treated as though inferior, and is not allowed equal
rights and privileges. This condition is due not to nature, but to
education . . ."
p. 161:
"Why then should one sex assert the inferiority of the other,
withholding just rights and privileges as though God had given His
authority for such a course of action?"
p. 162:
"Divine justice demands that the rights of both sexes should be equally
respected since neither is superior to the other in the eyes of Heaven."
p. 163:
"When men own [accept] the equality of women there will be no need
for them to struggle for their rights! One of the principles then of
Baha'u'llah is the equality of sex."
pp. 182-183:
"In this Revelation of Baha'u'llah, the women go neck and neck with
the men. In no movement will they be left behind. Their rights with
men are equal in degree. They will enter all the administrative
branches of politics [presumably, "siyasat,"="affairs of state" cf.
Ishraqat 8]. They will attain in all such a degree as will be considered
the very highest station of the world of humanity and will take part in
*all* affairs. Rest ye assured. Do ye not look upon the present
conditions; in the not far distant future the world of women will
become all-refulgent and all-glorious, *For His Holiness Baha'u'llah
Hath Willed it so!* At the time of elections the right to vote is the
inalienable right of women and the entrance of women into all human
departments is an irrefutable and incontrovertible question. No soul
can retard or prevent it . . ." [Note: in 1913 women did not have the
vote in the U.S.]
As regards the constitution of the House of Justice, Baha'u'llah
addresses the men. He says, `O ye men of the House of Justice!"
But when its members are to be elected, the right which
belongs to women, so far as their voting and their voice is concerned,
is indisputable. When the women attain to the ultimate degree of
progress, then, according to the exigency of the time and place, and
their great capacity, they shall obtain extraordinary privileges."
[I myself think this passage clearly hints that Baha'u'llah addressed
members of the houses of justice as "men/rijal" because women were
at that time largely illiterate and lacking in public experience. Might
not ultimate membership on the House be among the "extraordinary
privileges" they shall attain in the future? - JC]
Secret of Divine Civilization, p. 14:
"insuring the integrity of the members of society and their
equality before the law . . ."
Promulgation, p. 99:
"then will they proclaim equality of rights"
Promulgation, p. 166:
"Baha'u'llah . . . made woman respected by commanding that
all women be educated, that there be no difference in the education of
the two sexes and that man and woman share the same rights. In the
estimation of God there is no distinction of sex."
Promulgation, p, 182:
"Seventh, Baha'u'llah taught that an equal standard of human
rights must be recognized and adopted."
Now as for *eligibility* for Baha'i office-holding being a right, there
is a *very* interesting passage from Shoghi Effendi, *Messages to the
Baha'i World," pp. 64-65:
"Full rights have been accorded to Baha'i women residing in the cradle
of the Faith, to participate in the membership of both national and local
Baha'i Spiritual Assemblies, removing thereby the last remaining
obstacle to the enjoyment of complete equality of rights in the conduct
of the administrative affairs of the Persian Baha'i community."
The diction here is very instructive. Obviously, de jure or from the
point of view of legal principle, Baha'i women in Iran had the "right"
to eligibility for election to LSAs and NSAs from 1912 (or 1909
according to Rob) onward. But these rights could not be "accorded"
to them until around 1950, de facto. (In Shi`ite Islam values of gender
segregation are very strong and a mixed meeting of women and men
on an LSA would have been interpreted as an orgy of some sort; the
eyes of non-Baha'i neighbors thus made this sort of meeting very
chancy in Iran).
Thus, Baha'i women can have de jure rights to eligibility for
administrative office, but these rights de facto can be withheld for
reasons of community security and reputation, or for reasons of
women's unpreparedness (due to high rates of illiteracy, lack of
experience in public life, etc.). These rights are then "accorded" the
women de facto at some point in history where conditions allow it, by
the Head of the Faith. (There are parallels here to the legal language
employed in the UN for the process of decolonization in the two
decades after WW II, wherein entire peoples become "prepared"
through education etc. to exercise de facto their de jure rights of self-
determination, after a period of European mandates).
Based on the texts assembled above, I would argue that Baha'i women
clearly already have a de jure right to eligibility for service on the
Universal House of Justice, given the unequivocal command of
equality under the law (musavat-i huquq) and end of sex
discrimination, which is repeated over and over again by Baha'u'llah
and `Abdu'l-Baha. (This is only an individual opinion, the Cole
Fatwa.) I firmly believe that a future Universal House of Justice will at
some point "accord" Baha'i women their rights de facto.
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduMon Mar 25 10:43:19 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 14:24:14 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: women on UHJ & infal.
I need to get ready to go guys. So, why do you have to post things about
women on the House of Justice and infallibility? I can't possibly ignore
these issues.

I am sure that no harm is meant in suggesting that there is not 100%
equality between men and women. Also, I feel certain that the discussion
over "duty" vs. "right" to serve on administrative bodies is supposed to
be reassuring and not threatening. However, statements such as this have
been heard before. For example, they are exactly what Muslim apologists
are saying regarding the position of women in society. While I can see
ways in which society needs to deal with women's rights a bit differently
than men's because of women's childbearing role, to say that men and
women are not completely equal is opening a door to more discrimination
against women.

In a religion where administration has really become its central feature,
it is not easy to justify excluding women from any level of it. Now, if
there were an aspect of the Faith where only women could serve and it
were of equal importance with administration, maybe this would make some
sense. But there is not. As we are told repeatedly, everything has to
go through the administrative order, yet at its highest level, women
cannot be represented.

Now for a003's suggestion of blood bonding (how can anyone outdo what
Burl has said about this mattter?), I can only say that in societies
where such male bonding occurs, women's status is so low as to be
non-existent. Male bonding rituals are precisely designed to display
male "superiority" and to leave women out of the game completely. Once
again, there is no female equivalent - no way for women to bond and feel
good about themselves.

Everything else in the Faith points to men and women coming together,
learning from one another, with each gender developing the
(stereotypical) better qualities of the either. No sexual seclusion is
ever suggested. Men and women are supposed to work together on all
levels. From what I understand, the Baha'i marriage ideal does envision
a man and a woman living together under a single roof sharing each
other's life. The writings don't talk about women having their living
quarters and men's theirs. So, when people come up with theories about
why men alone should serve on the UHJ, the net effect is to undo all the
other notions we have about male/female interactions, male/female
equality and the like.

Although I know that no offense is meant by the comments made to explain
the exclusion of women on the HOuse, but the truth is that for many of
us, these explanations are quite hurtful. Ultimately, they say that
women somehow fall short of the ability to think logically, to understand
the world, to make sound judgments, AND to be guided by God.

As for infallibility - I don't have time left to discuss this topic. Let
me just say that, as a former Catholic, I learned to live with some
ambiguity on this topic. Sure the Pope is infallible, but that doesn't
mean he can't make mistakes. After all, he's only human.

Maybe my friend, former Catholic and mytic Terry Culhane, could add a few
words on this. Where are you, Terry?
Cheshmak and I are supposed to room together in Coventry, England.
Perhaps she and I can have a few rounds about women on the House in our
B&B. Linda
From r_wagner@foma.wsc.mass.eduMon Mar 25 10:43:53 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 14:47:19 -0500
From: r_wagner@foma.wsc.mass.edu
To: jwalbrid@indiana.edu, TALISMAN@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Long hairs and ear lobes
One inescapable observation is that Abd'ul-Baha Himself was
not in compliance with this rule, judging by the published
photographs.
Ralph Wagner
From alma@indirect.comMon Mar 25 10:47:09 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 13:40:02 -0700
From: Alma Engels
To: "talisman@indiana.edu"
Subject: Re: Re. Women & UHJ
Does anyone but me wonder how the different definitions of gender affect the
membership of the Universal House of Justice? Since not all who consider
themselves to be men are genetically or physically (in the sense that they
were born with mixed-gender organs) men, it is possible that there has
already been a membefr of the Universal House of Justice who is not by every
definition male. And given the premise that there may be as many as 4% of
the population of mixed or wrong gender, isn't it probably that one of these
will eventually be a Member?
In peace,
Alma
To tread the path of Love Alma Engels
Is no mere game. alma@indirect.com
For only one
Out of many thousands
Can persevere in His Love. (Tahirih)
From A.Aniss@unsw.EDU.AUMon Mar 25 10:47:37 1996
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 22:37:36 +1000 (EST)
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: saberi
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: writing on Shih Islam scholars
Dear Talismanaians,
Here is a tablet from baha'u'llah on shih Islam Scholars.
I leave it to you friends on deduce your understandings of it
in relationship to present discussion on Baha'i scholars.
[tablet]
XXVIII. Happy is the man who will arise to serve
My Cause, and glorify My beauteous Name. Take
hold of My Book with the power of My might, and
cleave tenaciously to whatsoever commandment thy
Lord, the Ordainer, the All-Wise, hath prescribed
therein. Behold, O &Muhammad, how the sayings and
doings of the followers of &Shi'ih &Islam have dulled
the joy and fervor of its early days, and tarnished the
pristine brilliancy of its light. In its primitive days,
whilst they still adhered to the precepts associated
with the name of their Prophet, the Lord of mankind,
their career was marked by an unbroken chain
of victories and triumphs. As they gradually strayed
from the path of their Ideal Leader and Master, as
they turned away from the Light of God and corrupted
the principle of His Divine unity, and as they
increasingly centered their attention upon them who
were only the revealers of the potency of His Word,
their power was turned into weakness, their glory
into shame, their courage into fear. Thou dost witness
to what a pass they have come. Behold, how they
have joined partners with Him Who is the Focal-Point
of Divine unity. Behold how their evil doings
have hindered them from recognizing, in the Day of
Resurrection, the Word of Truth, exalted be His
glory. We cherish the hope that this people will
+P70
henceforth shield themselves from vain hopes and idle
fancies, and will attain to a true understanding of
the meaning of Divine unity.
The Person of the Manifestation hath ever been
the representative and mouthpiece of God. He, in
truth, is the Day Spring of God's most excellent
Titles, and the Dawning-Place of His exalted
Attributes. If any be set up by His side as peers, if
they be regarded as identical with His Person, how
can it, then, be maintained that the Divine Being is
One and Incomparable, that His Essence is indivisible
and peerless? Meditate on that which We have,
through the power of truth, revealed unto thee, and
be thou of them that comprehend its meaning.
Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah page 68-70
Happy Nuw Ruz to you all
With warm regards,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Mar 25 10:48:01 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 08:52:01 +1200
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re. Women & UHJ
talismanites,
Juan wrote:
I firmly believe that a future Universal House of Justice will at
>some point "accord" Baha'i women their rights de facto.
Some arguments may be meaningfully engaged in, but this is not one of them.
The House has given its ruling on this matter ands the viewpoints of Cole
and McGlinn (et al) are clearly at variance with that ruling. Those of you
who have not read earlier correspondence on this matter and feel that these
people may be amenable to reasoned discussion are in for a cruel
awakening. I strongly urge people to not engage in fruitless discussions
with these people.
R
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Mar 25 10:51:30 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 96 14:39:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: "r_wagner@foma.wsc.mass.edu"
,
talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Long hairs and ear lobes
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
> One inescapable observation is that Abd'ul-Baha Himself was not
> in compliance with this rule, judging by the published
> photographs.
I think we want to be a bit careful here, as there is no "rule"
as yet. What Baha'u'llah provided was a general statement which
cannot be construed as a specific law (hence, as John says, noone
able to tell you what it means). As Ian Semple used to explain
there are at least 6 ways for the House of Justice to legislate
on this subject: 1. shorter than ear lobes all around; 2. Long
hair on back, but short sideburns; etc. Since the House of
Justice has not legislated on the matter, and there was no Baha'i
"rule", Abdu'l-Baha was in compliance with societal standards of
His time -- and the same goes for us, for the time being.
regards, ahang.
From Alethinos@aol.comMon Mar 25 10:52:25 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 16:12:33 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
I've got this sickening feeling deep down that we are once again going to
embark on another round of massively irrelevent blathering about this
subject. Please tell me I am mistaken and that this distant rumbling is just
the collective gas-letting of folk who can't get beyond the narrow vision of
late-twentieth century Americana soci-political pap. Folk who think that
because they caught a few interviews of J. Campbell with Bill Moyer or
because they are familiar with a few legal/constitutional terms tghey have
grasped the implications of a revelation designed for the next thousand
years.
Please let us not waste shocking amount of time over an issue that has, at
this moment in our history and in the balance of our needs very little
weight. The attempts to try and twist this into some litmus test for the
viablility of the Faith in dealing with human rights is a mistake. Instead of
wasting huge amounts of intellectual energy trying to break through a barrier
that doesn't actually exist why don't we instead address the needs of the
crushing of human spirits under the massive wheels of Addictive Consumption,
Greed, Economic Injustice, Materialism. The incredible cloud of hopelessness
that is descending on America - now so clearly seen by many (see Atlantic
Monthly, Jim Leher News Hour, Haper's Magazine, etc.) should be a claxon
going off in all our heads. No society does particularly well when faced with
hopelessness; but I would suggest that Europeans, and esp. Americans, with
our particular axiological bent do far worse than others in coping with it.
Recent history should give more than adequate examples. The best being
Depression-era Germany.
Or will we, as typical late-twentieth century Americans refuse to let go our
petty p.o.v.s and insist that OUR wants and OUR percieved rights (erroneous
as they may be) are all that DOES matter.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From a003@lehigh.eduMon Mar 25 10:52:55 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 16:14:21 EST
From: a003@lehigh.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Responding to Linda's post...Linda of Ninja fame, Linda of the cream pie...:
She wrote:
I am sure that no harm is meant in suggesting that there is not 100%
equality between men and women. Also, I feel certain that the discussion
over "duty" vs. "right" to serve on administrative bodies is supposed to
be reassuring and not threatening. However, statements such as this have
been heard before. For example, they are exactly what Muslim apologists
are saying regarding the position of women in society. While I can see
ways in which society needs to deal with women's rights a bit differently
than men's because of women's childbearing role, to say that men and
women are not completely equal is opening a door to more discrimination
against women.
I agree. I think that saying that men and women are not equal is very
dangerous and linguistically against the basic tenants of our Faith.
In a religion where administration has really become its central feature,
it is not easy to justify excluding women from any level of it. Now, if
there were an aspect of the Faith where only women could serve and it
were of equal importance with administration, maybe this would make some
sense. But there is not. As we are told repeatedly, everything has to
go through the administrative order, yet at its highest level, women
cannot be represented.
Yes, this is true it seems to me. It is not easy to justify.
Now for a003's suggestion of blood bonding (how can anyone outdo what
Burl has said about this matter?), I can only say that in societies
where such male bonding occurs, women's status is so low as to be
non-existent. Male bonding rituals are precisely designed to display
male "superiority" and to leave women out of the game completely. Once
again, there is no female equivalent - no way for women to bond and feel
good about themselves.
Here, we get wobbly. This is not a question of whether women need a way
to feel good about themselves. I.E. they can only feel good about
themselves if they can do everything that men can do. Male bonding
rituals are *not*, and I repeat *not* necessarily designed to display
male "superiority". They are designed to help a man become a man, which
means take on his spiritual and social responsibilities in life. To take
on the burden.
Linda went on to say:
Although I know that no offense is meant by the comments made to explain
the exclusion of women on the House, but the truth is that for many of
us, these explanations are quite hurtful. Ultimately, they say that
women somehow fall short of the ability to think logically, to understand
the world, to make sound judgments, AND to be guided by God.
Well, Let's make this perfectly clear... (no, I despair of that ever
being possible through this medium...) This has nothing to do with
women's ability to think logically, to understand the world, etc. etc.
This is about *men*, their needs. If followed logically, it makes clear
that the exclusion of women on the House of Justice is a result of
something that is *lacking* in men that women already have.
We discuss this because it's important. It needs to be worked out. I
hesitate to be involved with painful issues, and I will drop this one if I
feel I can't take the heat or I'm causing too much pain. I do not discuss
this lightly, as a sport.
Yours sincerely,
a003
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduMon Mar 25 10:53:07 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 16:17:46 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: chain reactions
Dearest 003,
BTW, why not 009?. People of the creative sort, like you and others
create chain reactions to one single thought which gives birth to
many other thoughts. You may end up with something entirely
different. Those who are addicted to logical sequences (linear
thinkers) may not be able to keep up with this sort of thinking.
But, those with complex minds have a different ability to see
things in a matrix. So, although I know what you were saying
you started me on a different, but continual path of your thoughts.
This sort of clashing of diverse thoughts is a perfect example of the
statement "life is a probability pattern of relationships".
Just as diverse elements in nature create certain patterns and give
birth to new organisms, thoughts work the same way. I think!!
Think about the scientific development. I suggest that it is not
the linear thinkers that made the stupendous discoveries. Those
who are considered to have "learning disabilities" were the brightest
of wo/men in our times.
Freedom of thought and expression should be a practice in
all human endeavours and not remain just as a political rhetoric.
I enjoy my own diverse shades of thought and freely express
them, with or without appreciation. Y'now what I mean???
I understand your points Bill. I just added from different
dimensions. We're okay!!
love,
q.
**************************************************************************
A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole
planet, freed from national hinderances and restrictions, and functioning
with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity.-Shoghi Effendi, 1936
From a003@lehigh.eduMon Mar 25 11:01:37 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 17:05:47 EST
From: a003@lehigh.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: (fwd) Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
Dear Jim,
You wrote:
I've got this sickening feeling deep down that we are once again going to
embark on another round of massively irrelevent blathering about this
subject. Please tell me I am mistaken and that this distant rumbling is just
the collective gas-letting of folk who can't get beyond the narrow vision of
late-twentieth century Americana soci-political pap. Folk who think that
because they caught a few interviews of J. Campbell with Bill Moyer or
because they are familiar with a few legal/constitutional terms tghey have
grasped the implications of a revelation designed for the next thousand
years.
Umm! O.K., I guess you think Campbell's work is soci-political pap. I
think it's important work. We disagree. Of course, that doesn't mean you
weren't referring to my ideas being soci-political pap. I wasn't sure.
You don't want this subject to be discussed. That seems clear. There are
other things that need to be discussed. That's for sure. Feel free to
talk about them.
No, I don't feel or think I understand the implications of a revelation
designed for the next thousand years. I simply think and am suggesting an
insight for why the House of Justice is all men.
Sincerely and with love,
a003
From Member1700@aol.comMon Mar 25 11:02:14 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 17:33:48 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Sources for Martyrdom
Congratulations on beginning your research into Babi and Baha'i ideas about
martyrdom! It is a very big topic, and I am sure that there will be plenty
for your to investigate.
By bibliographic skills are in disrepute at the moment, since I obviously
missed the Naw-Ruz prayer of 'Abdu'l-Baha when going through Star of the West
to do research for Kalimat's book on Naw-Ruz, but there is a doctoral
dissertation by Fereshteh Bethel on the subject of Baha'i martyrdom which you
should have a look at. The title is "A Psychological Theory of Martyrdom: A
Content Analysis of Personal Documents of Baha'i Martyrs of Iran written
between 1979 and 1982" written for a PhD in psychology (1984) at United
States International University--and which I suppose should be available on
University Microfilms, if you ask.
Now, who was it? I think it was Michael Fisher (the anthropologist who
did some work on the Baha'i community of Yazd before the Islamic Revolution)
who commented that this dissertation tended to adopt the same formula for
martyrdom that is pardigmatic in Shiism, but I don't recall where he said
that. I thought the comment apt, at the time.
You will also need to consult some of the major biographical compilations
in Persian, which present the lives of numerous Baha'i martyrs, as well as
the voluminous Tarikh-i Shuhada Yazd--which is certainly a Baha'i classic,
and an extremely popular work in the Iranian Baha'i community, providing just
about all the paradigms that there are. Anyway, Juan or John or Ahang can
better help you along these lines.
Warmest,
Tony
From jwalbrid@indiana.eduMon Mar 25 11:03:22 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 18:02:56 -0500 (EST)
From: jwalbrid
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Shi`i `ulama and the Imams
In the passage that Ahmad Aniss quotes, Baha'u'llah criticizes the Shi`ah
people (not specifically the clergy) for focusing their attention on the
Imams and allowing the Imams to distract them from Muhammad. The Baha'i
significance of this is presumably that we should not focus on our
equivalent of Imams--i.e., `Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi, and the
Administrative order--in ways that distract our attention from
Baha'u'llah.

I think this bears thinking about.
john walbridge
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comMon Mar 25 11:04:48 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 15:00:40 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Fwd:
---- Beginlk
Responding to Linda's post...Linda of Ninja fame, Linda of the cream
pie...:
She wrote:
I am sure that no harm is meant in suggesting that there is not 100%
equality between men and women. Also, I feel certain that the
discussion
over "duty" vs. "right" to serve on administrative bodies is supposed
to
be reassuring and not threatening. However, statements such as this
have
been heard before. For example, they are exactly what Muslim
apologists
are saying regarding the position of women in society. While I can see
ways in which society needs to deal with women's rights a bit
differently
than men's because of women's childbearing role, to say that men and
women are not completely equal is opening a door to more discrimination
against women.
I agree. I think that saying that men and women are not equal is
very
dangerous and linguistically against the basic tenants of our
Faith.
In a religion where administration has really become its central
feature,
it is not easy to justify excluding women from any level of it. Now,
if
there were an aspect of the Faith where only women could serve and it
were of equal importance with administration, maybe this would make
some
sense. But there is not. As we are told repeatedly, everything has to
go through the administrative order, yet at its highest level, women
cannot be represented.
Yes, this is true it seems to me. It is not easy to justify.
Now for a003's suggestion of blood bonding (how can anyone outdo what
Burl has said about this matter?), I can only say that in societies
where such male bonding occurs, women's status is so low as to be
non-existent. Male bonding rituals are precisely designed to display
male "superiority" and to leave women out of the game completely. Once
again, there is no female equivalent - no way for women to bond and
feel
good about themselves.
Here, we get wobbly. This is not a question of whether women need
a way
to feel good about themselves. I.E. they can only feel good about
themselves if they can do everything that men can do. Male bonding
rituals are *not*, and I repeat *not* necessarily designed to
display
male "superiority". They are designed to help a man become a man,
which
means take on his spiritual and social responsibilities in life.
To take
on the burden.
Linda went on to say:
Although I know that no offense is meant by the comments made to
explain
the exclusion of women on the House, but the truth is that for many of
us, these explanations are quite hurtful. Ultimately, they say that
women somehow fall short of the ability to think logically, to
understand
the world, to make sound judgments, AND to be guided by God.
Well, Let's make this perfectly clear... (no, I despair of that
ever
being possible through this medium...) This has nothing to do with
women's ability to think logically, to understand the world, etc.
etc.
This is about *men*, their needs. If followed logically, it makes
clear
that the exclusion of women on the House of Justice is a result of
something that is *lacking* in men that women already have.
We discuss this because it's important. It needs to be worked out.
I
hesitate to be involved with painful issues, and I will drop this
one if I
feel I can't take the heat or I'm causing too much pain. I do not
discuss
this lightly, as a sport.
Yours sincerely,
a003
My dear Bill/a003
I have to say the posts you have so far put out on this subject,
although I relaise your sincerity and do not doubt it for one moment,
can only be perceived as demeaning to Women in general and singly.The
fact is we do not know why women are given the exemption of not having
to serve on the Universal House of Justice.The worst reason I have ever
heard given one that I have previously posted on Talisman during the
last discussion on this subject is as follows:Women can not serve on
the House of Justice because a woman could be pregnant and therefore an
unelected soul would be engaged in the consultation of the Universal
House of Justice.We are a religion that does not believe in the gender
of the soul.Therefore anything that can be implied to infer any type of
inferiority of the female gender has to be regarded as erroneous.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cocksh
From Member1700@aol.comMon Mar 25 11:06:32 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 18:42:54 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: infallibility
Dear Bill:
Oh, yes, infallibility has been discussed on Talisman, and in spades! I
suppose that Eric will do his usual brilliant work and will provide you with
hundreds of earlier postings on this subject.
We did come to a consensus of sorts, that infallibility (at a minimum)
establishes the House of Justice as the court of last appeal in the Baha'i
community. I don't think that we could agree on anything else.
As far as ontological infallibility is concerned, I believe that Hans
Kung has established rather elegantly, with regard to doctrines of
infallibility in the Catholic Church, that such a concept is (and logically
must be) meaningless. I should say that I, also, find the idea of a
"magical" kind of infallibility quite meaningless--more often an excuse for
sloppy or lazy thinking than anything else.
I think that infallibility should be separated out from two related
concepts--on is the idea of omniscience and the other is the idea of the
Covenant. The latter first, the Covenant (as a concept) can be separated
logically from the idea of infallibility. The idea that Baha'i owe
allegiance and obedience to their institutions as they operate within their
legitimate spheres can be maintained quite independently of any notions of
their infallibility. After all, the Covenant functions in relations to local
and national Assemblies--which have no claim to infallibility. It functions
in the same way with regard to the House of Justice, which does have such a
claim. As far as the Covenant is concerned, then, the idea of infallibility
is at best icing-on-the-cake, so to speak--or, at the other extreme,
irrelevant. A Baha'i owes loyalty and obedience to the House of Justice
whether or not it is infallible, and their legitimacy as the supreme head of
the community remains intact, regardless of errors.
With regard to omniscience (the notion that the House's decisions are not
dependent on accurate information), the House of Justice has itself
specifically repudiated such an idea. The relevant letters from the House
have been posted on Talisman before, and I would call upon poor Eric to do so
again. I doubt if I could find them, since my computer files are such a
mess. Anyway, suffice it to say that the House reserves the right (as did
the Guardian) to revise its decisions in the light of new information of
which they were previously unaware--not changed circumstances, mind you, new
information.
That having been said, I think we are left with a minimalist definition
of infallibility, despite ourselves. I think of it as exactly what
'Abdu'l-Baha said: That the House is under the protection of Baha'u'llah, in
some way. (Also the Bab, by the way.) By this, I understand that the
community's obedience to the House will preserve its unity, and that unity
will be protected as long as the community has a legitimate head.
All that, in my view, has little or nothing to do with making mistakes.
But, then, you can have Ahang tell you about certain deserted and
radioactive islands in the Pacific that would have pioneers that glow in the
dark on them right now, if we were to insist on the no-mistakes theory.
Warmest,
Tony
From Alethinos@aol.comMon Mar 25 11:06:56 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 18:55:55 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: (fwd) Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
Dear fellow:
You indeed did not read my post closely. I have the upmost respect for J.
Campbell. I have read most his works and a good deal of his mentor Jung.
And I wasn't describing your _thoughts_ as pap; rather that you seem to have
bought into the _pap_ of this soci-cultural phenomenon - the gasping and
struggling of an axiology that no longer is suited to our needs.
You seem to be under the impression that the Universal House of Justice
decided to make itself all male in membership - as if this had never been
mentioned, (or if so, simply in passing) by Baha'u'llah. Now no doubt Juan
can, through etymological feats that would inspire a New York lawyer, make it
seem as if Baha'u'llah never *really* meant to say that the those who are
elected to the House were to be all males but the point is moot! The
Universal House of Justice - to which we all declare allegiance due to our
belief and faith in Baha'u'llah and His Covanant, has declared its emphatic
decision on the matter.Period. Over. Done. I suggest that if we really don't
wish to accept this, well then why stop there? I personally would love to be
able to sip a margarita every night. I am sure with enough linguistic
training I can find a way for Baha'u'llah to actually state that some alcohol
is ok - so long as I don't become really intoxicated. Or that electioneering
for a position on an assembly is perhaps, after all permissable, given the
context of the word ________* used at high noon on the third tuesday of the
month (of course this all depending on the phase of the moon and who was the
currently the reigning Ulma in Cairo at the moment.)
The point here is that the issue, whether we *like* the answer or not, has
been decided. Maybe . . .maybe one day things will turn out as Juan states.
But for right now it is not relevent.
But then this is so typical of we Americans - esp. in the Faith. Let us
debate the living hell out of the color of the napkins at next weeks assembly
meeting while across town children in the 'hood are being shot and raped.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comMon Mar 25 11:07:18 1996
Date: 24 Mar 96 19:37:37 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: "INTERNET:Wilgar123@aol.com"
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
BAHA'I-TALISMAN-LIST ,
Theologos
Subject: Re: Dale's World: A realm of no false statements and actual verbal infallibility
March 24, 1996
Subject: How to Become Infallible and to enter Dale's World.
Dear Bill:
I enjoyed your raising of this topic about ontological versus relational
infallibility. My questions are: what does "infallibility" actually mean? and
"what value does it really have?"
Do you mind if I have a little serious fun with this topic? This is in
no way meant to disparage. And, as you suggest, let's echo the words of a
famous philosopher: "I think, therefore I laugh."
It's spring! It's beautiful outside! The Creative Process is surging
forward rapidly around us and within! Therefore, let us achieve today what has
never been achieved before. Let us achieve, in fact, the seemingly impossible.
Let us become infallible. Just like God. Well, almost...
In fact, any articulate being can become verbally infallible, and without
all the effort of trying to become truly God-like. As I see now, it's actually
quite easy! All it takes is a little care in our phraseology and a little
training in certain types of verbal gymnastics.
I will now proceed to demonstrate by way of several types of utterances.
(1) "Do the best you can!" (This is an ethically infallible
exhortation.)
(2) "2 + 2 = 4." (Given suitable axioms, this is true by definition.)
(3) "Ouch! My tooth really hurts!" (An example of expressing a direct
internal perception about which one cannot possibly be wrong.)
(4) "It may be true that X," where X is any statement capable of truth or
falsity.
(5) "Is it true that X?" (Questions are not true or false.)
(6) "Hi! (Exclamations are not true or false.)
(7) "Let me ask you a question." (Imperatives are neither true nor
false.)
Etc.
Do you see what I'm getting at?
How do I generalize this in a serious way to help us and our institutions
live maximally infallible and thus maximally ethical lives?
I have seldom before deliberately made myself the butt of endless future
humor and ridicule, but at the risk of doing so and of losing serious respect
among the Talismanians and other net-beings, I am about to now lay claim to a
possibly new realm, call it Dale's World, in which our ethical aim is to achieve
maximal actual infallibility. I claim that this is an actually realizable world
and that it may well be a much better world than the Real World.
First, let me introduce you all to Dale's World, and to the sytematic
properties of this new realm, and let me invite you to comment on and compare
them with the properties of the verbal world in which you currently reside.
To enter Dale's World, a world of maximal truthfulness and infallibility
in our statements, we must simply choose at least one of at least nine
strategies. They are:
(1) limit our speech as much as possible to necessarily correct types of
statements (1=1, 2=2, 3=3, etc.) or
(2) utter necessarily unchallengeable ethical exhortations to do the
good ("Always do your best. Always, always do your best. Always, under all
circumstances, do your best." Etc.), or,
(3) utter or express immediate internal perceptions that cannot possibly
be wrong even if Descartes' Deceptive Demon were at work ("I see red." "I feel
pain." "That felt good."), or,
(4) Where we get into fuzzy realms like externally referenced empirical
facts, etc., then we adopt a correspondingly fuzzy logic of "maybe." Instead of
asserting clearly and distinctly, "It is definitely raining outside", we say
"Hmm. Maybe it is raining outside" or "Either it is raining or not raining
outside."
Or
(5) we can turn our statements into questions, or
(6) into exclamations such as "Hi!" or
(7) into imperatives or requests for permission ( "Let me listen to your
story." "Have a seat! Have a soda!"), none of which are true or false
propositions.
Or,
(8) whenever possible, we can generalize and broaden our descriptions.
(Instead of saying, it's 10.9995678932 degrees below zero outside!" which is
false because it overstates the accuracy of your home thermometer, say "It's
between absolute zero and some infinite temperature." This by definition must
be true. When someone asks you where you are going, say "somewhere other than
nowhere." ( I owe that one to my son, John Henry Dale, who uttered it at the age
of seven and thus added an immortal contribution to wisdom out of the mouths of
babes.) ETc.
Or
(9) Just say as little as possible. Silence is neither true nor false
unless it can be construed as an implied answer such as "yes" or "no".
You will notice that each of these nine categories of infallible
statements or actions (there may be more than nine) is capable of generating an
infinite class of utterances or an infinite number of situations (silence),
which is more than enough to fill a whole lifetime. And one method can be used
in conjunction with others, generating additional infinite realms of possible
utternances. Would such a lifetime be valuable?
I invite comment on how these nine strategies are currently used by
people and institutions to maximize their infallibility of utterance in addition
to any other kinds of infallibity they may have, and how they could improve
themselves in this regard. (Does the concept of infallibility include the
concept of static perfection or of progressive perfection?)
It would also be interesting to see how exactly Dale's World would be
different from the Real World in terms of its ability to convey accurate-enough
information to permit society to continue to function. My hunch is that Dales
World, in which all statements are either true or neither true nor false, could
do just as good a job as the Real World at conveying information. After, all,
Dale's World is simply the Real World minus only all false statements. How,
then, can it be worse at conveying truthful information?
I hope that Dale's World will contribute in a serious way to our ability
to look at this notion of infallibility, to discover how many kinds there are
and what actual value these different types of infallibility may have.
It is clear that some types of infallibility are extremely useful while
others may be trivial and valueless and that there can be a divergence between
infallibility and the Good. For example, a person could spend their lives
repeating nothing but "Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy upon us." His or her life
could be in this regard infallible, but would it be a maximally good life?
Probably not. Look at Meher Baba, who maintained continuous silence. Silence
is infallible. Was it maximally good for him to be infallible in this way?
What about the infallibility of the logic of scientific discovery? Some
people argue that science is the best method of arriving at truth that we
presently control. Is a method which produces continuous self-improvement
infallible in a general way?
And again, according to some theologians, the notion of God's perfection
cannot be seen consistently as an absolute static perfection but as a relative
perfection that keeps getting better in its "consequent nature" as the Creation
evolves. Can such a God be infallible? It would be relative. Does that make
sense?
In any case, thank you for having visited Dale's World, and come back as
often as you like!
Sincerely,
John Dale
From 73043.1540@compuserve.comMon Mar 25 11:07:34 1996
Date: 24 Mar 96 19:38:09 EST
From: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
To: Marilyn Higgins
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
BAHA'I-TALISMAN-LIST
Subject: Re: bahai-st-digest V1 #91
Dear Marilyn and Everyone Else,
Marilyn, again you have provided a fine quality of insight on th etopic
of the gender of the UHJ. And Everyone Else, thanks to all of you for your
suggestions and thoughts and help in terms of archives, etc. to a newcomer on
Talisman. Through all of you I have gained a lot and will continue to think
about this. However, I want to be clear that I really did not want to raise
again painful issues which apparently many of you just recently went through at
great length.
I used to struggle and struggle and struggle with this UHJ gender issue
in terms of its apparent conflict with the equality principle, until I noticed
that Abdu'l-Baha's phrase "which will ere long be made manifest as clearly as
the sun at high noon" (SWAB, p 79-80) could be interpreted as a Middle-Eastern
way of saying very modestly and gnostically and even a bit humorously "ere long
it will be as clear as 'Baha'u'llah'", since the symbol of Baha'u'llah's
revelation, as Abdu'l-Baha explains, is the sun at its highest station, at high
noon.
This is a typical Middle Eastern way of concealing the answer while at
the same time giving it. It's like Christ saying that He will return in the
glory of the Father. This literally gives us Christ's "new name" (Baha'u'llah
-- The Glory of the Lord (Lord = Father)) mentioned in Rev. 3:12, but it's not
quite given to you right out. It is deliberately "veiled" slightly.
Why? I don't kow, obviously, why Abdu'l-Baha would choose this topic to
treat in this way. In general, this may be a method of providing an opportunity
for souls to experience a breakthrough to wisdom, to give the soul the
possibility of experiencing at some point a "release from ignorance", a
vivification, an act of gnosis, as a result of which the 'I' becomes capable of
experiencing in one embrace
* the ordinary literal level of associative "word-thinking" and
* the spiritual illumination of that ordinary level which vivifies it by
giving it the reality behind the
outward meaning.
Rather than serving its usual role as just the passive ("attached") receptor or
"screen" of outer or inner activities, the 'I' for an instant becomes "detached"
and becomes the conductor of the "third force", the reconciling element between
two distinct levels which yet must and do have a connection. This shift gives
the soul a taste of insight which can awaken it to yearn for something deeper
and more permanent through increasingly conscious work on itself.
This "revealing yet deliberately veiling" device is widely used in
spiritual traditions. I am particularly aware of it in the religions arising in
the Middle East, but I think it goes back much much further, for one can find
spiritual number symbolism even in very ancient cave paintings in France dating
from 25,000 or 30,000 years ago, where, for example, mooses are deliberately
drawn with two sets of antlers of nine subantlers each attached to the head,
forming a 19-term system. The painting reveals the fact that even back then,
somebody understood the role of the triad in the process of manifestation from
and reblending with the Source. Possession of the knowledge is symbolized by the
antlers, but the exact content of the knowledge or the idea from which it
derives is not given directly. So this method of symbolizing spiritual knowledge
seems to have been in use a very long time. Of course it also relates to the
fact that God Himself is "veiled" from us for our own protection.
Anyway, after seeing this, everything fell into place for me, because it
fitted with the reason for the number of members on the UHJ being 9 -- 9 is "the
number of Baha". It's a symbol of respect and a reminding factor of the
Manifestation and His Presence.
It also showed me how the Baha'i community could someday possibly gain a
consensus on this issue: namely through simply seeing that the answer is already
right in front of us in the very words Abdu'l-Baha gave us. The answer is
already there -- all we have to do is to remove the veil in ourselves
disconnecting us from Baha'u'llah, and it shines forth at us like the sun at
high noon, literally as 'Baha'u'llah'.
For me, then, the gender of people on the House of Justice is male for
the same reason that their number is 9: simply to serve as symbol and reminding
factor of Baha'u'llah.
This also fits with the idea which we know definitively from other
sources in the Faith that men and women have an equal spiritual dignity and
spiritual station.
And it seems self-contained enough to eliminate the need to introduce
more speculative conjectures.
I have found that explaining it to new seekers in this way, as possibly
being a symbol of Baha'u'llah's guiding Presence, generally satisfies them both
intellectually and emotionally and in terms of their immediate intuition of
correctness, if I may use that term.
The problem with it is, ironically, that as a solution, it is so simple
that it makes some of our heat and bother look a little foolish. And this issue
has caused so much turmoil! Plus there are undeniable ethical questions here as
to why a symbol should take precedence over the vital message that presumably
could be sent loud and clear by having women on the House of Justice. What I am
reading from other people now makes me think again that maybe there _are_ more
dimensions to this than simply being a symbol. Sometimes simple elegant
solutions lend themselves to being right, but elegance is simply elegance and
not total correctness necessarily.
In any case, I am not here to cause more turmoil. And if anyone thinks
my personal interpretation violates something else in the Writings, please let
me know as soon as possible!
Maybe the wisest policy is indeed to simply confess ignorance and to add
that we do know that whatever the reason is, it is _not_ that men are
spiritually "superior" to women in some sense. That we definitely do know, and
we should make it clear to the world that this is the case.
Maybe, since God deals with us at _our_ level of capacity and not His
own, He just saw that human males in leadership positions around the world were
still so hopelessly limited and egoistic and arrogant in their thinking that to
have women on the House of Justice would rattle their cages too loudly and
unduly retard acceptance of the Faith's guidance by the predominantly male
leadership of nationstates and other hierarchical frameworks of social
organization which males excel at being at the top of. God did the moderate
thing. Words of milk from the breast of divine patience and knowledge. Maybe
in keeping the UHJ male, Baha'u'llah acted, ironically, with "feminine"
qualities of balance and wisdom so that the perfect (a mixed House) would not
become the enemy of the good (a male House that could more rapidly gain
acceptance given current human male development). Maybe then, this symbol
should be seen as a symbol of shame for our not having evolved enough to have
permitted the full will of God to be revealed and as a reminding factor to all
of us to work together to bring society up to the point that when the next
Manifestation comes, She will be able to step forth on Earth in her full beauty.
-- Just my own thoughts. In our religion, God, still hidden from us, is "The
Most Beautiful."
I also learned a bit more about male anthropology and bonding customs
from Bill's interesting post, but I think the logic and facts are in need of a
little more work before it will stick as a viable hypothesis about the UHJ.
Well, enough, and thanks again for all your helpful efforts and ideas.
John Dale
From A.Aniss@unsw.EDU.AUMon Mar 25 11:10:10 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 22:42:16 +1000
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: translation of tablet names
Dear Talismanians,
Dear Ahang,
I have to thank you for extending the list that I posted a while ago to Talisman.
By adding the information on where to find the original tablets you have
made life for many researcher much easier. I guess it would be nice to
work on an eventual comprehensive list. I myself do not like the words
"best known works", but can't think of another other way of calling them.
As you know in some Persian books tablets are presented to a reader without
some introduction to them such as name and place of their revelation.
So this list may come very handy.
Regarding translation of Tablet's names into English, I have to thank you to
correct me on some which I am listing here, they are of course better renderings:
Baz-Av-u-Bidih-Jami (return and grant a chalice)
Ziyarat-Namih-i-Awliya (Tablet of Visitation of exalted ones)
Surah-i-A`rab (Surih on Grammer)
Tajalliyat (Effulgences)
Surah-i-Fadhl (Tablet of Mercy)
Also I have to thank you for correcting me on these two tablets:
Surah-i-Hajj I (Tablet of Pilgrimage I - Shiraz)
Surah-i-Hajj II (Tablet of Pilgrimage II - Baghdad)
However I still have problems with your translations of the following:
Javahiru'l-Asrar (The Gems of Mysteries) (The Essence of Mysteries)
Lawh-i-Basitatu'l-Haqiqih (Tablet of Apperant Truth) (Tablet of The Element of Truth)
I think the word Javahir is coming from Juhar which means essence and so I think
my translation is more representative to truth.
Also Basitatu'l can not be translated as Apperant and this would be your deduction
for the word. It is really The element as a word.
The word qadir means Omnipotent and Pre-Destination is Gedar so
my translation should be correct.
Surah-i-Qadir (Tablet of Pre-Destination) (Tablet of Omnipotent)
For the following tablets I prefer my translations to yours, but yours can
be used as well.
Surah-i-Zuhur (Tablet of Advent (Manifestation))
Surah-i-Nush (Tablet of Proclamation (Advise))
Surah-i-Bayan (Tablet of The Utterance(Speech))
Subhanaka-Ya-Hu (Praise be to Him (Lawh-i-Naqus (Tablet of The Bell))
Lawh-i-Sayyah (Tablet of Traveller (addressed to Shaykh Sayyah))
Lawh-i-Nasir (Tablet of Nasir (Defender) (addressed to Nasir-i Qazvini))
Lawh-i-Khalil (Tablet Friend (addressed to Jinab-Khalil))
Lawh-i-Karim (Tablet for Karim (Noble))
Lawh-i-Jamal (Tablet of Beauty (addressed to Aqa Jamal-i Burujirdi))
Lawh-i-Ashraf (Tablet for Ashraf (Noble))
Kitab-i-Badi` (The Book of Badi (New))
For next tablet I do not have preferences and either reasoning or proof can be used.
Lawh-i-Burhan (Tablet of Burhan (Reasoning)) (Tablet of the Proof)
With the next two tablets I have a great deal of problem. By puting Eternal as the
name now you have made three different versions, again I think using a deduced
word rather than a literal word is not right and so I have opted for the Youth of
Paradise as more apprpriate name. The second Tablet is more problematic
as correct translation is impossible. There are no words in English that can render
the words Rashh-i-Ama, so I realy don't know what should be used. I opted for
exudation of cloud before.
Lawh-i-Ghulamul-Khuld (Tablet of Eternal Youth) (Tablet of The Deathless Youth/ Youth of Paradise)
Rashh-i-Ama (Sprinkling of Cloud of Unknowing)
For this next tablet I translated the word Fitnih and I think although I used the name
of individuals for other tablets, in this case I think it should be translated and then
mention the person's name that which is honoured with it.
Lawh-i-Fitnih (Tablet of Sedition(or The Test)) (Tablet addressed to Shams-i Jahan, known as Fitnih)
Last for:
Kitab-i-Ahdi (The Book of My Covenant)
the Guardian has translated it as above but in the new publication from UHJ, the book
Tablets of Baha'u'llah it is translated as Kitab-i-Ahd (The Book of Covenant) and so
I think it should be corrected as such, as their approval preceeds other directives.
With warm regards,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Mar 25 11:10:21 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 14:28:11 +1300
From: Robert Johnston
To: talisman@indiana.edu, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us
Subject: mediatrix of the unconsious
Friends,
Ted Cope -- inspired by Jung -- was fond of saying that the anima
is the mediatrix of the collective unconscious. I have a question: in
Jungian psychology does the *animus* (masculine principle) ever
mediate/show forth the images of the collective unconscious? Anyone know?
R.
From margreet@margreet.seanet.comMon Mar 25 11:10:42 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 19:12:26 -0800
From: "Marguerite K.Gipson"
To: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>,
Marilyn Higgins
Cc: Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
BAHA'I-TALISMAN-LIST
Subject: Re: bahai-st-digest V1 #91
Hello all.. I was just wondering what the policy is on Cross-Posting-- or
Spamming is in regards to the various list we have going here. I can see
that sometimes the topics are the same on 2 or more lists, but can we please
be more careful and only post to one list at a time... or bcc (Blind CC:)
to the other lists if you want to post the same to that list...
(If you need assistance.... Send the mail out to the other list one at a
time.... This is a recording.)
Thanks...I have enough email for anyone I know, I am one true
Cyber-junky..., and have only enough time for those I subscribe.
Thanks again,
Margreet
At 07:38 PM 3/24/96 EST, John Dale wrote:
>Dear Marilyn and Everyone Else,
>
>
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comMon Mar 25 11:13:23 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 96 20:15:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: translation of tablet names
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
Beloved Ahmad,
It goes without saying that we'll continue to owe you a great
debt of gratitude in providing this list of Tablets of
Baha'u'llah which as you say will needs to be expanded by adding
other details on source(s) and translation. Also, many thanks
for sharing very important comments which are noted below:
> Javahiru'l-Asrar (The Gems of Mysteries) (The Essence of
> Mysteries). I think the word Javahir is coming from Juhar
> which means essence and so I think my translation is more
> representative to truth.
I must admit that my thinking on this has been greatly influenced
by Juan's beautiful translation of this Work and if I'm not
mistaking, he has rendered it "The Gems of Mysteries" (is that
right, Juan?). Juhar in Arabic is borrowed from Pahlavi term,
Govhar, which means gems or pearls. We use it in the same sense
in Persian and abbreviate it to Guhar, and when borrowed in
Arabic, the gaf was replaced with jim, making it Juhar. Now, it
also does mean essence too, in the sense that a gem is the
essence of nature. So, perhaps either translation would work.
If Behrouz Tavanger is reading this, perhaps he could provide
some insight based on his father's massive research on this Work,
too.
> Lawh-i-Basitatu'l-Haqiqih (Tablet of Apparent Truth) (Tablet of
> The Element of Truth). Also Basitatu'l can not be translated
> as Apparent and this would be your deduction for the word. It >
is really The element as a word.
We need John or Nima to explain this term a bit more. Moojan
Momen translated this Tablet a while back and posted it on
Tarjuman but regrettably I don't keep copies of such things and
can't remember how he translated. In older literature on
chemistry, the term "ashiya' basitih" is used to refer to basic
elements, eg. hydrogen, oxygen, etc. But the term literally
means expanded; its also one of the Names of God in Islam,
"Illahu'l-Basit" (the Provider). In short, I don't know what I'm
talking about, and we need better input.
> Subhanaka-Ya-Hu (Praise be to Him (Lawh-i-Naqus (Tablet of The
> Bell))
I like the suggestion of dropping the first title and using
Lawh-i Naqus as its title. It sure simplifies..
> Lawh-i-Sayyah (Tablet of Traveller (addressed to Shaykh
> Sayyah))
Since Sayyah is being used as someone's title, perhaps it be
better to preserve that in the title, like Lawh-i Nabil, so this
would be Tablet of Sayyah. Similarly for the following Tablets:
> Lawh-i-Nasir (Tablet of Nasir (Defender) (addressed to Nasir-i
> Qazvini))
> Lawh-i-Khalil (Tablet Friend (addressed to Jinab-Khalil))
> Lawh-i-Karim (Tablet for Karim (Noble))
> Lawh-i-Jamal (Tablet of Beauty (addressed to Aqa Jamal-i
> Burujirdi))
> Lawh-i-Ashraf (Tablet for Ashraf (Noble))
> Kitab-i-Badi` (The Book of Badi (New))
It seems that Badi` is being used as "wondrous" in this title.
No?
> Lawh-i-Burhan (Tablet of Burhan (Reasoning)) (Tablet of the
> Proof)
My suggestion was to make the translation consistent with the
World Centre's translation as Tablet of the Proof.
> Lawh-i-Ghulamul-Khuld (Tablet of Eternal Youth) (Tablet of The
> Deathless Youth/ Youth of Paradise)
> Rashh-i-Ama (Sprinkling of Cloud of Unknowing)
As you correctly point out, neither of these titles are easy to
translate, so I think it might be better for the time being to go
along with the way that the translators of these two Works have
rendered them. The first one is closer to "Eternal Youth of
Paradise", but this is such awkward phrasing.
> Kitab-i-Ahdi (The Book of My Covenant) the Guardian has
> translated it as above but in the new publication from UHJ, the
> book Tablets of Baha'u'llah it is translated as Kitab-i-Ahd
> (The Book of Covenant) and so I think it should be corrected as
> such, as their approval preceeds other directives.
I have to say that in my view (with all due apologies) the World
Centre's revised translation is incorrect. The original of this
Tablet was printed in Adiyah-i Hazrat-i Mahbub which was reviewed
by Abdu'l-Baha before printing, and the title there is "Kitabu
Ahdi". Note "Kitab-i Ahdi" is incorrect, as its Persianized
reading of the Arabic phrase "Kitabu" -- "u" is added to Kitab
because a name follows. "Ahdi" means "My Covenant". The "i" at
the end of Ahd makes it sing. possessive. Therefore, as the
original Text in the hand of Baha'u'llah has never been produced
(there are a bit of rumors associated with it, which is beyond
our discussion), then we must go along with Abdu'l-Baha's
approved title, which has "My" in the title, hence "Kitab-i Ahd"
is incorrect, so is "The Book of Covenant". In other words, if
in the recent publication someone has altered the Guardian's
translation, they have messed up. Pure and simple.
Again, many thanks for your continued enrichment of our
understanding.
best regards, ahang.
From a003@lehigh.eduMon Mar 25 11:14:05 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 23:27:16 EST
From: a003@lehigh.edu
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
Jim wrote:
Dear fellow:
You indeed did not read my post closely. I have the up most respect for J.
Campbell. I have read most his works and a good deal of his mentor Jung.
And I wasn't describing your _thoughts_ as pap; rather that you seem to have
bought into the _pap_ of this soci-cultural phenomenon - the gasping and
struggling of an axiology that no longer is suited to our needs.
You seem to be under the impression that the Universal House of Justice
decided to make itself all male in membership - as if this had never been
mentioned, (or if so, simply in passing) by Baha'u'llah.
Dear Jim: Well, I like to understand why things are the way they are.
I've always been that way. That struggle is important, though I don't
wish to waste precious time. Yours or anyone else's.
No, I realize it was Baha'u'llah who commanded that the beloved House of
Justice be comprised entirely of men. It's important to have a rationale
for this law if one can, at least a personal one, if somebody asks. To
say "I don't know" is possible but only on a temporary basis.
The comments about dear Mr. Cole were inexplicable to me.
With sincere Baha'i love,
Bill
From CaryER_ms@msn.comMon Mar 25 11:14:22 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 04:35:22 UT
From: "Hannah E. Reinstein"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, Alma Engels
Subject: Re. Women & UHJ
Dear Alma and friends,
>Does anyone but me wonder how the different definitions of gender affect the
>membership of the Universal House of Justice?
Surprisingly, I've never wondered! I'm in an uncommon and stressful enough
situation that I have much more immediate worries
your choice here>.
The only persons who can answer your question are those who can read the
Writings in the original languages or the Research Department in Haifa. They
can tell us the criteria for membership with a fair degree of accuracy, that
is, whether it is gender or sex. Those criteria are definitely not the same as
one is biological and the other is social and mental. Most of us know
absolutely nothing about the shades of gender or sexual terminology in Arabic
and Persian.
I suspect that the criteria is natal sex. Of course, in a small percentage of
humanity, that is an ambiguous criteria. Perhaps 96% of the population can
clearly determine if they are potential members of the Universal House of
Justice. A very few are intersexed persons, hermaphrodites, etc. Most of those
persons will never know their ambiguous nativity. It is a common practice for
doctors in the US to intervene surgically immediately after delivery. They
simply intervene to consign the infant to one sex or the other. That is done
as routinely as cutting the cord. It is a cosmetic move, highly judgmental,
and now, in these more gender-aware times, highly controversial.
It seems to me that a person's birth sex is closest to an objective criteria,
though as I mentioned, only the native speakers or translators can confirm
that idea. Otherwise, some people would avail themselves of future advances in
medical technology to change their eligibility for House membership. Obviously
that would be untenable if not unscrupulous. Are a tiny minority of persons
permanently ineligible according to this idea of mine? I really don't know. I
spent most of my life publicly denying and hiding my real gender. I never
permitted myself to consider any concepts related to gender at all until six
months ago. So, please take these ideas as very tentative.
Insofar as we know, humans cannot change their sex. There is no known way for
anyone to change their X and Y chromosome pairings nor the genetic material or
role that they bring to the reproductive process. It is true that a tiny
percentage of people are born with profound gender dysphoria (an estimated one
in 30,000). An even smaller percentage of that minority (an estimated one out
of nine) seeks surgical remedies in order to live and be accepted socially and
legally as the opposite of their birth sex. Surgery enables them to have
sexual relations with the opposite sex if they desire it. By no means do all
persons who undergo surgery desire that however. Sex, gender, and sexual
orientation are intertwined in a myriad of natural though poorly understood
ways. But no post-operative person has ever changed their reproductive
capacity or genetic structures. Humans simply do not have that capacity. Human
technology is also not capable of achieving it. Some amphibians and reptiles
do but in humans it is a pure simulation. The desire to be whole and thus
healed of such a tragic birth defect is very profound. New research has
suggested that it is a biological birth defect that is related to structures
in the hypothalamus.
All of my speculation suggests that a future House of Justice will issue a
ruling on the matter when it becomes necessary. That may be the result of an
election that causes controversy or something that we can't possibly
anticipate. Obviously, at this time, they feel no need to consider the matter.
Can anyone point out a pressing or practical need now?
As for the hope frequently expressed on this list about a future House
admitting women, it is pure speculation. It is idealistic. It is beautiful. It
is hopeful. It is exciting. But it is pure speculation. No amount of wishing,
cajoling nor discourse can cause it to happen. It will not happen on a
timetable of our choosing for sure. And it will not happen as a result of
lobbying no matter how intense or sincere. That is also clear.
Hannah (for the benefit of newbies on the list, a transgendered individual)
============
"Today, we've secretly replaced the USS. Enterprise's Dilithium
crystals with new Folger's flavor crystals...Let's see if they notice!"
----------
From: owner-talisman@indiana.edu on behalf of Alma Engels
Sent: Sunday, 24 March, 1996 12:40 PM
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re. Women & UHJ
Does anyone but me wonder how the different definitions of gender affect the
membership of the Universal House of Justice? Since not all who consider
themselves to be men are genetically or physically (in the sense that they
were born with mixed-gender organs) men, it is possible that there has
already been a membefr of the Universal House of Justice who is not by every
definition male. And given the premise that there may be as many as 4% of
the population of mixed or wrong gender, isn't it probably that one of these
will eventually be a Member?
In peace,
Alma
From dann.may@sandbox.telepath.comMon Mar 25 11:16:13 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 96 21:58:48 -0600 (CST)
From: dann.may@sandbox.telepath.com
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: HAPPY NAW RUZ
Juan,
I appreciated your thoughts on Naw-Ruz, especially concerning the fact that
it means a "new day" -- a new begining, a time to forgive and forget. I
wish you and your family a joyous and productive new year and a joyous
Ridvan!
Many thanks, your fellow traveler on the journey of the heart and soul,
Dann
Warmest greetings, Dann May, Philosophy, OK City Univ.
---
* WR 1.32 # 669 * Seize thou the Cup of Life with the hands of confidence.
From robert.johnston@stonebow.otago.ac.nzMon Mar 25 11:16:35 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 22:00:22 +1200 (NZST)
From: Robert Johnston
To: a003@lehigh.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
Dear, dear Bill,
>
> The comments about dear Mr. Cole were inexplicable to me.
Confucius and Socrates placed great store by giving things their correct
names. If names are not correct, they rockoned, then disorder runs riot.
Names includes definitions. The House in this dispensation is comprised of
men, and dear Juan Cole is Dr. not Mr. I found your Campbell expanation
interesting, though I doubt that it is right. Much is inexplicable, but we
must try not make a virtue of our incomprehension...
your friend,
Ironic as ever, (and probably damned),
Robert.
From friberg@will.brl.ntt.jpMon Mar 25 11:17:45 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 20:07:57 JST
From: "Stephen R. Friberg"
To: talisman@indiana.edu, friberg@will.brl.ntt.jp
Subject: Women and the House
Dear Friends:
Physicists sometimes post their naive, over-simplified descriptions of
how they imagine that issues in the humanities can be resolved, often to
the considerable embarassment of all concerned. Perhaps this is one
of those times.
Moreover, I don't have any answers, but rather questions about the
dichotomies that typify modern thinking. My physicist's over-
simplification of a complex situation, namely, the reason why only
men are at present allowed to be members of the Universal House
of Justice, is based on the concept that the question will force
us to deepen and expand our understanding. Perhaps this question,
like some others in the Faith, serves as a kind of Baha'i "koan".
[A koan is a Zen Buddhist question designed to tax the rational
facilities so much that enlightenment is achieved.]
The dichotomy that comes to my mind is the one that we have been
exploring for some time now: liberal (rights oriented, rule oriented
social organizational forms) versus conservative (family oriented,
structurally oriented, rule-making social organization). BUT!!
My discussion is not political, nor am I interested in characterizing
anybody as being this or that. Rather, my aim is to use the forms of
organization associated with what are sometimes labelled *liberalism*
and *conservativism* as a way to gain insight into ways of doing things.
In other words, I see liberal vs. conservative as a dichotomy along
the lines of other dichotomies like plus and minus, or masculine and
feminine, or (from quantum physics viewpoint) position and velocity.
To illustrate my method, let me first apply it to academia. Academia
is liberal, in the sense that it insists on a rule-based, rights-based
organization that guarantees a fairly large degree of independence
from control by others. Only if someone breaks the "rules" are they
deprived of the "right" to be supported by their institution (in
principle), otherwise they have the "right" to speak out as they wish.
On the other hand, academic hierarchy and evaluation is based on
age-old conservative social network-organized, self-evaluating, family
and community-like values strongly at odds with rule-based, rights-
based systems of thought. While everybody has the right to speak out,
only those deemed to have authority are listened to.
In this example, what I am trying to do is use the concepts of liberal
and conservative to talk about different forms of social organization,
saying, in effect, that *any* organization is a mixture of *liberal*
and *conservative* forms. Clearly, an extremely liberal organization
would be a highly rationalistic affair, much like a computer program,
whereas a extremely conservative organization would be something like
an absolute dictatorship. Contrast this with the usual definitions
of liberal and conservative. For example, *extremely conservative*
usually means that time-honored traditions can not be departed from.
But, this, of course, means that they have become rules, which, is to
say, the organization is rule-based, which I have defined as liberal.
[Clearly, there are loose ends when one tries to define conservative
and liberal!]
How do I attempt to apply these concepts to the issue of women
membership of the House of Justice? In a very wobbly way, I assure
you. Let me make the attempt:
The House clearly is an authoritative, legislative body. In that
sense it is both conservative, in that it is based on the perogative
of its right to issue rules for the Baha'i community to abide by.
But, because of the rule-based nature of the legislative way in
which it interacts with the Baha'i community, it supports and endorses
a "liberal" system of rule-based, rights-based community structures.
So, as an institution, it has components of both liberal and
conservative social structuring.
What does this have to do with women serving on the House? Well,
the only answer that I can get out of my argument is the following:
from the conservative (if you will, the family-oriented point of view)
authority is exercised usually by men. In other words, the world
simply has not advanced to the degree that the equality of men and
women is sufficiently established. Therefore, in a practical sense
in keeping with the preparedness of humanity, Baha'u'llah made the
House all male.
Of course, this point has been made several times before. What I
have done here is merely to tie the argument to an attempt to
conceptualize about institutional structures and the balance
necessary to make them effective in a practical (as opposed to
visionary) sense. I believe that my attempt to do that is
perhaps more significant than the almost automatic answer that
drops out at the end.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen R. Friberg
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduMon Mar 25 15:41:56 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 12:09:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: talisman
Subject: men's hair
It is of interest that Haydar Ali records that 'Abdu'l-Baha told him to
stop shaving his head as this was against the law of the Aqdas, yet there
was an established 'Baha'i' hairstyle with long hair combed behind the
ears. This style was not simply contemporary usage but group specific and
identifying.
It is actually physically impossible not to have hair growing below the
level of the ears without shaving the head to some extent.
One of the themes of the Aqdas is the abolishing of clerical/lay or
'estate' distinctions. I think this passage probably needs to be seen in
the context of abolishing sumptuary expression of such social
distinctions.
Jackson
From cenglish@aztec.asu.eduMon Mar 25 15:42:14 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:41:00 -0700 (MST)
From: "THOMAS C. ENGLISH"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Gender questions
On Sun Mar 24 13:40:02 1996
alma@indirect.com (Alma Engels)
Asked
>Does anyone but me wonder how the different definitions
>of gender affect the membership of the Universal House
>of Justice? Since not all who consider themselves to be
>men are genetically or physically (in the sense that they
>were born with mixed-gender organs) men.
Off the top, I'd say it probably depends on their haircut....
But this is a topic worth reflection since these biological
issues are a reality, some small percentage of our species
must deal with them, and the Baha'i community must be aware
of them so we don't act like knee jerks.
--
Wisdom without science cannot fully know the meaning of the
created and material cosmos. Science without wisdom leaves humans
enslaved to a world of unrelated objects where order and
significance in human existence cannot be discovered. - T. Merton
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduMon Mar 25 15:43:19 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 12:39:22 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: can't we talk?
I do hope that Burl's message about the importance of our discussions
will convince Jim that we should shoulder on. This is important stuff.
If women gaining more say in the world is supposed to lead to world peace
(I do think it says that in the writings, doesn't it?) then, why pray
tell, should we not think it might also be important for women to be on
the House. (Oh, I just remembered the awful joke about "women on the
house.")
Now, aOO3, one of the problems with your blood bonding theory is that
menstrual blood is related to women's "powers," not to their "power."
Men have power, women have powers. In other words, because we are
deprived of running things, we have to put hexes on people, or something
like that. As you can see, I am really involved in working out this theory.
Now, (dear, probably damned) Robert, haven't we agreed that the only
thing we were really going to be quiet about on Talisman was the
atrocious inability of Derek to punctuate and capitalize. This subject
is off limits because of Derek's exceptionally sensitive nature.
However, I never saw an agreement whereby we stated that we couldn't
carry on the debate with "those people" - Sen and Juan about women on
the House. . If you have one,
please send it. If you have lost the agreement about Derek, I'll fax you
a copy.
In the meantime, let me recommend some of Derek's marmalade for Jim and
Robert's toes. It didn't work on John but we're all different. Linda
From L. Mon Mar 25 15:53:31 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:14:51 +0100 (MET)
From: L.
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: (fwd) Re: men's-true-nation
Dear Mr. George,
You read like you are quite in harmony with the Goddess movement. I could
have been reading a Starhawk novel. Do you also believe that Africans
worship trees?
Any, and I mean any "scholar" who tries to put forth what "women" think,
believe, act, do, desire, etc. is a sloppy one by any stretch of the
imagination. How many billions of women are there? How many live in
radically different cultures? Anyone who thinks they can speak for all
women is a fool. I, as a woman, do not go through very powerful feelings
and events when I menstruate; I do not feel any profound connecting force to
the cycles of the moon and the universe; and it has zero affect on any
possible source of spiritual power I might have. I dare to say that the
same goes for my friends. It is a biological function, like breathing,
eating, and sleeping. Thealogians are wise when they put forth their work
only as a personal interpretation.
As you can tell, I am not a big Joseph Campbell fan.
> What I was trying to suggest is that women go through very powerful
> feelings and events as a result of menstruation. It is a profound
> connecting force for them to the cycles of the moon and the universe.
> According to Joseph Campbell, it has a major effect on the source of
> their "spiritual power."
I apologize deeply if this has come across harshly, it was not my intent.
You are certainly entitled to your opinions. I just do not think they are
grounded in any respectable research.
Sincerely,
(Dr.) L.
From meghas@sparcom.comMon Mar 25 15:53:58 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 03:05 PST
From: Megha Shyam
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Some tablets of Abdu'l Baha
Dear friends -
While doing some spring cleaning this past weekend, I discovered that I had
a collection of over 100 letters written by Abdu'l Baha to the friends in
the US,
Canada and elsewhere. Most of these letters are not published, I will spend
next wekend indexing them and post it here. I acquired photo copies of some
of these from teh Wilmette Archives, and a set of others was given to me long
ago and had forgotten about them. Any way, by next Monday, I hope to post
an index.
Megha Shyam

From MBOYER%UKANVM.BITNET@pucc.PRINCETON.EDUMon Mar 25 15:54:48 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 13:57:38 CST
From: Milissa Boyer
To: Jim Harrison
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: (fwd) Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
Dear Mr Harrison--
When Baha'u'llah said that "Today women are accounted as men (rijal)"
what do you think He meant?
Sincerely,
Milissa Boyer
mboyer@ukans.edu
From 72110.2126@compuserve.comMon Mar 25 15:56:57 1996
Date: 25 Mar 96 13:09:58 EST
From: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Healing Prayers, Please
Dear Talismanians,
Those of you who attended the Talisman Mysticism Conference at Bosch may
remember my son Tyler, the tall 14-year old with braces and a happy,
outgoing demeanor. This past weekend Tyler was seriously injured when
a car hit him while he was rollerblading. The first 48 hours were rough,
but he has come through them quite well and is home recovering. He
sustained a severe tibia/fibula fracture (lower leg) which had to be
repaired with steel plates and screws, and thankfully has no cranial or
internal injuries.
Your healing prayers would be most appreciated.
Love,
David
From burlb@bmi.netMon Mar 25 16:57:26 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 13:22 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: belove@sover.net
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: talisman arguments
>I was reading the latest sequence of talismanian arguments -- all the
questions about orthodoxy and correct attitudes and right to argue and so on
-- and it occured to me that, for me, it was listening to Jews trying to be
like Catholic by going through Islam. Is that the true meaning of Bahai?
>
>Philip
>
Dear Philip:

It took you this long to figure out the true meaning of Baha'i?
B (Bar Mitzvahs)
+ A (Archdiocese)
+ H ( Holy See)
+ A ( Ali)
+ I (Islam)
---------------------------
total: Baha'i
Now, where was I? ...oh yes:
"Abdul Baha has pointed out that `Among the miracles which distinguish this
sacred dispensation is this, that women have evinced a greater boldness than
men when enlisted in the ranks of the Faith.'
Shoghi Effendi has further stated that this "boldness" must, in the course
of time "be more convincingly demonstrated, and win for the beloved Cause
victories more stirring than any it has yet achieved."
Universal House of Justice, 25 May 1975
"...a real evidence of women's superiority will be her service and efficacy
in the establishment of universal peace."
Abdul Baha.
BB
>
>
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduMon Mar 25 16:58:43 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 15:57:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: L.
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: new prayer
On Thu, 21 Mar 1996, Loni Bramson-Lerche wrote:
> The Naw-Ruz prayer by Abdu'-Baha and translated by Shoghi Effendi, which Dr.
> Armstrong-Ingram so kindly posted, is not unpublished. It was probably
> published in *Star of the West*. I say probably because I did not note down
> where I photocopied it from. It might have been *Baha'i News*, but the
> typeset looks like that of *Star of the West*. I suspect the same is true
> for the other "unpublished" translations Dr. Armstrong-Ingram found.
>
It is unfortunate that we can't send images along with these messages
because I am dying to see this photocopy. The 1920s was a prolific
period for Baha'i magazines in the US and I believe I have seen most of
the issues, but I do not recollect seeing this prayer in any of them. All
the US magazines were published with running titles so that if this was a
photocopy from one it should be evident from the heading (although
running titles were occassionally dropped for display pages with
borders). Is there a page number on the photocopy?
The set of translations it is from seems to be
a set that was being used by Shoghi Effendi to improve his translating
skills; they are much smoother than the translations he was doing as a
secretary in 1919, but not as fluent in English as he would shortly
become. It is very likely that he sent the set to more than one
recipient and in particular that he would have sent it to England for
critique. I wonder if this published version was done in England? If
there is no page number, it might have been printed as a single sheet as
was done with many texts.
Jackson
P.S. It is necessary for me to correct one thing in Dr Bramson-Lerche's
posting. I presume that as we have not actually met she refers to me in
formal style due to her natural politeness, however she does so with a
professional title that I cannot
technically use. My doctoral work was published with PH.D. after my name
as when the type was set I had been informed that this would be correct
by the time the book came out. However, due to a tritely soap opera set
of circumstances it was not. As this matter has been in a quasi-sub
judice situation since, I am not supposed to comment further. I am sorry
to be mysterious, but neither did I wish to be misleading by not
correcting. One or two people on this list know something of the
situation, I would ask that they restrain themselves from posting any
further elucidation. I will merely say that a _full_ file of
documentation exists and mystery will one day be dispelled.
From burlb@bmi.netMon Mar 25 16:59:13 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 13:28 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: Megha Shyam
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Some tablets of Abdu'l Baha
>Dear friends -
>
>While doing some spring cleaning this past weekend, I discovered that I had
>a collection of over 100 letters written by Abdu'l Baha
Yeah, ain't that a kick? Happens here all the time too. Never forget the
time we found the note in my uncle's basement -- you know, the one where
Uncle Mort confessed that his family were the Jews that killed Jesus. Uncle
Mort said they did it because he wouldn't become a doctor. Well, that
settled that.
Now, while your digging out those tablets from the Master, see if you find
some original Picassos and a few Monets in the pantry.

Sorry, I can't help it. It just sounds so funny to me for you to say you
have 100 letters from the Center of God's Covenant that you forgot about and
stumbled upon doing spring cleaning. Sort of like finding the Arc of the
Covenant in your garage behind the Studebaker..."OH! So *that's* where we
left it!
Burl
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduMon Mar 25 16:59:24 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:17:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: L.
Cc: talisman
Subject: Re: (fwd) Re: men's-true-nation
Hear Hear!!
What she said in spades.
Jackson
From nineteen@onramp.netTue Mar 26 17:35:07 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:00:18 -0500
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: John Dale <73043.1540@compuserve.com>
Cc: "INTERNET:Wilgar123@aol.com" ,
Baha'i-Sci-of-Real-List ,
Baha'i-st-List ,
BAHA'I-TALISMAN-LIST ,
Theologos
Subject: Re: Dale's World: A realm of no false statements and actual verbal infallibility
> How do I generalize this in a serious way to help us and our institutions
> live maximally infallible and thus maximally ethical lives?
>
> I have seldom before deliberately made myself the butt of endless future
> humor and ridicule, but at the risk of doing so and of losing serious respect
> among the Talismanians and other net-beings, I am about to now lay claim to a
> possibly new realm, call it Dale's World, in which our ethical aim is to achieve
> maximal actual infallibility. I claim that this is an actually realizable world
> and that it may well be a much better world than the Real World.
Dear Dale,
Words have their limitations as you have admirably demonstrated. Yet
apparently the Guardian chose to use "Infallibility" in full
consciousness of its consequences for the English speaking reader.
Naturally, one can approach a word on many levels, and to a certain
extent render a word *harmless* or meaningless as some of the friends
have attempted to do in the case of Infalliblility. 20 years ago I took
essentially the same stance because I felt such concepts were too
inaccurate for the modern mind and problematic for seekers and Baha'is
alike. In other words, infallibilty must be seen as superstition.
Like some others on this forum I took the infallibility of the House to
be a "divine mandate" accorded to it by Baha'u'llah, and nothing more;
because that is something easily explained. Yet it seems clear that
infallibility has something to do with the spiritual influence of the
Bab and Baha'u'llah upon the UHJ for which the Guardian chose the word
"GUIDANCE".
It seems perfectly possible to me that the actions of the House wihtin
its prescribed sphere could be termed infallible or guided or both
without a loss of linguistic integrity, but one would not make the
mistake of defining the Baha'i Faith as the Catholic Church. There are
many extra-rational processes we are asked as Baha'is to accept--I
believe this has something to do with our development as spiritual
beings--yet the idea that everything can be successfully and adequately
rationalized is to my mind hubris. Baha'is of course can choose to
believe that there are mystical processes unavailable to their intelect
or not, but I don't think anyone is defining those processes as Deux ex
Machina which is an antiquated and childish event oriented explaination.
The problem as I see it is trying to talk about something that happens
in a higher dimension with a language and experience that is rooted in a
lower dimension. For example, if twins were in a mothers womb and they
were on some primitive level able to communicate with each other and
they knew they were having some health problem in what way would they be
able to know or speculate about the fact that they were in a hospital
with their mother or that a doctor was treating their condition?
In our case Abdu'l-Baha has let us know that something very important is
transpiring between the House and ourselves (Mother and child) but we
have no knowledge of the actions of the Divine Physician on our behalf
as He guides the House to our benefit.
Richard
From A.Aniss@unsw.EDU.AUTue Mar 26 17:36:30 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:25:04 +1000
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: scolars in Shi`ih Islam
Dear Talismanians,
Dear John,
You Wrote:
> In the passage that Ahmad Aniss quotes, Baha'u'llah criticizes the Shi`ah
> people (not specifically the clergy) for focusing their attention on the
> Imams and allowing the Imams to distract them from Muhammad. The Baha'i
> significance of this is presumably that we should not focus on our
> equivalent of Imams--i.e., `Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi, and the
> Administrative order--in ways that distract our attention from
> Baha'u'llah.
>
> I think this bears thinking about.
With all respect for John I have to say that he has got it wrong
in this instance, and I am some what shaken with his remarks which
is totally of the point. Let me elaborate on this by using sections
of the passage that I quoted from. These are my deductions from that
quotation:
At the begining of the tablet Baha'u'llah states:
" Behold, O Muhammad, how the sayings and
doings of the followers of Shi'ih Islam have dulled
the joy and fervor of its early days, and tarnished the
pristine brilliancy of its light."
So He is talking about present situation of His time and
outcome of the deeds and actions of the Shi`ih followers.
"In its primitive days,
whilst they still adhered to the precepts associated
with the name of their Prophet, the Lord of mankind,
their career was marked by an unbroken chain
of victories and triumphs."
Clearly here, He is talking about time of Muhammad and the
period of Imamat, which was an unbroken chain of period
in history of Islam. So He states that this period i.e.
the time of Muhammad and the Imams was pure and victorious
for the Faith of Islam.
"As they gradually strayed
from the path of their Ideal Leader and Master, as
they turned away from the Light of God and corrupted
the principle of His Divine unity, and as they
increasingly centered their attention upon them who
were only the revealers of the potency of His Word,
their power was turned into weakness, their glory
into shame, their courage into fear."
Here, He elaborates on the process. It is a gradual
process. The leaders after Imamat gradually centered
their thoughts on other matters and as a result the
followers of the Faith as Baha'u'llah puts it
"increasingly centered their attention upon them who
were only the revealers of the potency of His Word",
which could only mean Ulama of the Faith such as
Mujtahids, Imam-Jum`ih and present Ayat'u'llas.
they were the revealers of the potency of His Word.
This situation is as clear as the noon sun in present
Iran, where Ayat`u`llas even in their grave have more
importance than the Imams.
"Thou dost witness
to what a pass they have come. Behold, how they
have joined partners with Him Who is the Focal-Point
of Divine unity. Behold how their evil doings
have hindered them from recognizing, in the Day of
Resurrection, the Word of Truth, exalted be His
glory. We cherish the hope that this people will
henceforth shield themselves from vain hopes and idle
fancies, and will attain to a true understanding of
the meaning of Divine unity."
here He reiterates what was said before and wishes that
perhaps they will change.

"The Person of the Manifestation hath ever been
the representative and mouthpiece of God. He, in
truth, is the Day Spring of God's most excellent
Titles, and the Dawning-Place of His exalted
Attributes. If any be set up by His side as peers, if
they be regarded as identical with His Person, how
can it, then, be maintained that the Divine Being is
One and Incomparable, that His Essence is indivisible
and peerless?"
Here he elaborates on importance of the manifestation
of God and He being a mouthpiece of God and the danger
of puting peers to His personage.
"Meditate on that which We have,
through the power of truth, revealed unto thee, and
be thou of them that comprehend its meaning."
"XVIII Happy is the man who will arise to serve
My Cause, and glorify My beauteous Name. Take
hold of My Book with the power of My might, and
cleave tenaciously to whatsoever commandment thy
Lord, the Ordainer, the All-Wise, hath prescribed
therein."
Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah page 68-70
So the first and last paragraph of the tablet instruct
us to take heed on the events of history.
So to conclude I don't think John's deductions are right
the period of Imamat was a pure period and anyway their
poisitions can not be compared with that of Abdu'l-Baha
and The Guardian of our Faith. And I think the tablet
is talking about scolars that are purely human and have
no authoritative powers from God.
Secondly, my impression from this tablet is that we must
be carefull as scolars not cause deception and dicord
among our fellow Baha'is and abide by principles of our
Faith.
With warmest regards,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From jwalbrid@indiana.eduTue Mar 26 17:50:50 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 21:55:23 -0500 (EST)
From: jwalbrid
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Imams and `Ulama
"The revealers of the potency of His Word" seems to me to refer to the
Imams, rather than the clergy, although I could be wrong. The Shi`ite
golden age, the tablet seems to me to say, was the time of the imams,
after which the Shi`ites "corrupted the principle of His Divine
unity"--i.e., gave excessive veneration to beings other than God and His
prophet, which presumably is the Imams.

"The Person of the Manifestation hath ever been
the representative and mouthpiece of God. He, in
truth, is the Day Spring of God's most excellent
Titles, and the Dawning-Place of His exalted
Attributes. If any be set up by His side as peers, if
they be regarded as identical with His Person, how
can it, then, be maintained that the Divine Being is
One and Incomparable, that His Essence is indivisible
and peerless?"

This paragraph, I think, supports my reading of the tablet, since a near
deification of the imams is a feature of certain threads of later Shi`ism
(including the Bab, but that opens another issue).

There is a tradition in the Faith of criticizing the Shi`ite overemphasis
on the imams. Hujjat, for example, got in trouble for saying that the
bodies of the Imams were of the same nature as everybody else's. I can't
agree with Ahmad's reading of the Tablet. Anybody else wish to weigh in
on its meaning?

I will leave it to my good wife to comment on the relative veneration of
the imams and the ayatu'llahs in contemporary Shi`ism.

As for lack of charity in the Qur'an, Baha'u'llah talks in one of his
tablets about how upset he was as a child to read about the treatment of
the Jews of Medina in the time of the Prophet (some of them were executed
en masse).

john walbridge
From Member1700@aol.comTue Mar 26 17:51:31 1996
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 18:21:34 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: jwinters@epas.utoronto.ca
Subject: Re: Long hair on men
Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 22:09:01 -0500 (EST)
Resent-From: Jonah Winters
Resent-To: talisman
Didn't Baha'u'llah change his mind about all this in a later Tablet and say
that men are free concerning the cut of hair and beard, as long as they don't
make themselves the "playthings of the ignorant"? Or, have I gotten
confused, as usual?
Tony
From abtavangar@geoenv.comTue Mar 26 17:52:12 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 22:18:48 -0500
From: Alex Tavangar
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Essence vs jem (jaw'har)
Dear Ahang:
I did ask my father (in a brief conversation earlier this evening) about the
root of the word Jawa'her (please excuse my ad hoc transliterations). He
confirmed your explanation of the persian word "Gowhar" which was
subsequently arabisized to "Jow'har." The literal meaning of the word is
however closer to "jem" than "essence," although "essence has also been used
as in the beginning passage of The Hidden Words where Baha'u'llah says:
HE IS THE GLORY OF GLORIES
This is that which hath descended from the realm of glory, uttered by
the tongue of power and might, and revealed unto the Prophets of old. We
have taken the **inner essence** thereof and clothed it in the garment of
brevity, as a token of grace unto the righteous, that they may stand
faithful unto the Covenant of God, may fulfill in their lives His trust, and
in the realm of spirit obtain the **gem** of Divine virtue.
(Arabic Hidden Words, pages 0-1)
As we can see, two forms of the same word (jawa'her and jaw'har) in a single
passage are translated by Shoghi Effendi as "inner essence" once and "jem"
the second time. Context, according to my father will set the tone as to
which way one may translate the word "jaw'har." In the case of Jawa'her ul
Asr'ar, use of the word "Jems" seemed more appropriate to my father.
Warmest Regards,
Alex B. Tavangar
From barazanf@dg-rtp.dg.comTue Mar 26 17:52:29 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 23:11:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Farzin Barazandeh
To: Talisman
Subject: Long hair on men
Among hundreds of the unread messages, the subject "Long hair on men"
caught my attention, since I am balding and have developed a degree of
obsession about hair!
Until, a High decree and legislation arrive from Haifa, maybe I can
take the liberty and use some imagination to make sense of "Long hair.."
I recall I read a prayer by Baha'ullah which He praises the God by
His Hair. And in the mythological space, hair is associated with
eros, passion, spontaneity, fierceness and wild emotions.
So, Baha'u'llah is saying do not cut and deprive yourself from your
life energies, and do not let those energies cover your ears, and
be deprived from other melodies in life.
"The Christians gave eros poison. It did not die, but turned into vice."
Nietzche
Farzin
From gpoirier@acca.nmsu.eduTue Mar 26 17:52:46 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 21:51:04 -0700 (MST)
From: "[G. Brent Poirier]"
To: David Langness <72110.2126@compuserve.com>
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Actors of capacity
On 22 Mar 1996, David Langness wrote:
> I, too, am a fan of Ben Kingsley's fine and versatile work. And
although > I generally refrain from mentioning such things here in
Hollywoodland, Ben > is a good friend to a local Baha'i actress and has
been attending a fireside > or two here lately.
He will, no doubt, remember using the Baha'i Center in one of his
memorable scenes in "Ghandi" -- the one where he gets the British to stand
up in favor of his views by singing the British anthem.
From Alethinos@aol.comTue Mar 26 17:54:07 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:11:28 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
THIS was in response to a priv. post. I felt it might do double duty. All
possible ref. to person(s) involved have been deleted. JMH
**************************
Thank you for the note. I appreciate your concern over this matter. The issue
is, of what use is continued discussion? So what if it is a challege to some
folk? I doubt seriously that there is much of anything in the Faith that will
not *challenge* as we so euphemistically say these days, people. We seem to
think that if we endlessly whine and complain (under the guise of
*discussion*) on this issue that the House will eventually relent.
I am not insensitive to the difficulties this can bring up at times. But the
challenge is with the seeker after truth, not with the vehicle that is
delivering the message. The Faith has nothing to apologize for. If we are
that embarrassed because our Faith doesn't seem to conform to present
societal norms then there have, I think, more profound questions that need to
be asked. If it seems to contradict the issue of equality I think we might
all do well to investigate our present perceptions of what equality truly is.
I don't see Faith being strengthend by continiously (as has happened here on
Talisman) chasing our tails on this issue. This process, again
euphemistically described as *continued debate and exploration* is nothing
more than an extremely thin veil hiding egos that cannot stand being denied.
The House has made its decision. At this point in time there is no reason for
further discussion. We have recieved the answers and we will have to make due
with them. Not easy. Life would be easier if the answer had been different.
But then life would be easier for us if Baha'u'llah had not insisted that He
was the Return of Christ also.
The House is not a part of a legislative process. It is the Source of it. As
time goes on, and larger portions of the world come to the Faith it may turn
out as Juan for instance suggests that the House will be open to women. What
if it is? We act as if the House were the parliament or the senate. Our
warped illusions of what constitutes power and where it truly lies is, in
large part, the source of this debate now.
When we look back at the history of religion one of the first things we see,
esp. as Baha'is, the major blunders each of the previous religions made when
they bowed to the pressure of the cultural norms. Christianity, adopting sol
invictus deus on the old Roman calander to celebrate the birth of Christ
though it was quite obvious that Jesus must have been born between late March
and the first part of May. The Islamic philosophers who, in their attempts to
avoid the embarassment of the having the Qu'ran stand in stark opposition to
the *obvious truth* of Ptolemaic astronomy tried desperately to explain away
the utterence of Muhammad in that the stars were in a fixed place and the
worlds revolved about them (Q 36:37-41.) These are just two tiny examples,
there are plenty more.
There are more pressing issues at hand. This one may or may not play itself
out in the future. But tell me, how would you explain to the little sister of
the now dead brother who lies on the sidewalk that his death is cliched? That
it was more important for the Faith, esp. in America to continue to be
paralyzed either through the same spiritual diseases that this country
suffers from while it listens to the meaningless yapping late into the night
of mighty poodles over irrelevencies-of-the-moment - matters that while of
importance to many cannot come close to comparing with the overwhelming need
to bring spiritual healing as well as physical to millions? Tell me, how does
this compare? Are we so Goddamned comfortable in our smug liberal-democratic
self-righteousness that we can confidently walk past her tonight and each
night, on our way to our precious deepenings to endlessly debate supposed
rights that have been, (heaven forbid!) so callously tread upon?
Really? You think that is cliche' dear fellow? Come visit me and I will show
you just how outworn and overdone such violence to body and soul is,
firsthand, before your eyes.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From Alethinos@aol.comTue Mar 26 17:54:30 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:50:43 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: (fwd) Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
>Dear Mr Harrison--
>When Baha'u'llah said that "Today women are accounted as men (rijal)"
>what do you think He meant?
>Sincerely,
>Milissa Boyer
>mboyer@ukans.edu
The question is Ms. Boyer, what do you think He meant? Did He clearly state
that women would be members of the Universal House of Justice? Shall we play
the inference game as some would have us do? And to what end?
Would it really rock the world if tomorrow the Universal House of Justice
said that women could now serve on the House? Would the cover of Newsweek
proclaim NOW THE WAY IS CLEAR FOR TENS OF MILLIONS TO JOIN THE BAHA'I FAITH!
What great boon would descend upon the world if this were to occur? Would it
add something to the revelation of God?
It is not that this isn't a tough nut to swallow for a lot of us. It is that,
for the time being it has been answered. This has been pushed to the wall, so
to speak, and there is no room left. At least not now. So let's drop it and
move on to more critical matters. The future will tell.
Or are we going to have a Faith where our *faith* is tested each time we are
faced with something that stands opposed to our preconcieved notions of what
ought to be? Where we can't let something go for the time being because our
ego world-view is precariously dangling on the edge and can't bear the view
of Reality that confronts it; the Reality that says that not all of our
treasured notions will hold the Field today?

America is becoming a one-trick-pony show; and it would seem that the Faith
in America is too. Soon we will each have our own personal litmus test for
the validity of the Cause of God and it will all boil down to this: does it
suit ME.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From Geocitizen@aol.comTue Mar 26 17:55:19 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 02:53:45 -0500
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: UHJ, men, beginning with words, ending with -- ??
Robert and Jim have made some telling points in the last several days.
The optimist in all of us desperately wants to believe that debates over
subjects such as the permanence of women's ineligibility for membership on
the Universal House of Justice, or the reason(s) for this
ineligibility/exemption, or the acceptance (or not) of homosexual lifestyles
within the Baha'i community, may potentially yield insights we can use
constructively to fulfill the Baha'is' mission in the world.
In reality, the dominant effect of such debates has been quite the opposite,
at least in their occurences on Talisman. Far from increasing our
effectiveness as champions of human dignity and equality, they entangle us in
a web of partisanship and contention, isolating us from the pains most deeply
felt by our fellow human beings.
Talisman could be a powerful source of insights on many subjects vital to the
well-being of humanity, but these fruitless debates have effectively
neutralized Talisman's potential.
A few make valiant efforts to draw gem-like insights from the mire, but their
efforts are seldom supported by Talisman as a whole. Their efforts to spin
constructive threads out of the contention are ignored, as the combatants
leap to parry and thrust.
Meanwhile, out in the real world, (as Burl so effectively satirized) the
destructive forces inflicting such deep wounds on the body and soul of
humanity are free of such handicaps. They are mutually reinforcing, as each
cycle of violence and despair adds to the power and severity of the next.
Even the cycles of hope, fewer and farther as they are becoming, now feed
the despair, as each great new hope is soon revealed to be nothing more than
a cruel deception.
In the real world, we are not going to achieve the equality of women with men
by debating the future possibility of women serving on the Universal House of
Justice, no matter how long we pursue such debate. If we truly want to
achieve such equality, we had better discuss what will contribute to equality
for women in the real world.
We may be at a loss trying to explain "why" women are "exempted" from UHJ
service, but the niftiest explanation will not impress women who are
suffering under true oppression, and neither would getting a few women from
the elite elected to the UHJ.
Only if we make a real difference in the everyday lives of women can we claim
to have upheld the principle of equality Baha'u'llah has revealed. That is
where our efforts will have a realistic chance of yielding fruit that will
benefit humanity and stimulate the growth of the Baha'i community.
Otherwise, what begins with words will also end with nothing but words.
Regards,
Kevin Haines
From jrussell@bsl1.bslnet.comTue Mar 26 17:57:34 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 02:46:09 -0700 (MST)
From: Judith Russel
To: Geocitizen@aol.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: UHJ, men, beginning with words, ending with -- ??
I left Talisman last July with great regret, since I had so enjoyed the
frank, open, and intellectual atmosphere of the ongoing discussions and
threads. I pioneered to China at that time.
I return to find that some of the scholarly discussion (of Islamic Law,
of some untranslated Tablets, of the Kitab-i-Aqdas) has been pushed aside
by more emotional, personally-directed polemics. Although it's only been a
week since I've been on line, I find also that people who post more
thoughtful messages often do not get a response, whereas those with levity
(for which I am out of the loop, but I'm sure I will catch on soon) get
many responses.
Perhaps I am pretentious. Perhaps I am not "on the mark". Perhaps I just
miss an image of Talisman that wasn't really real. But when I reread the
list rules, I noticed there was mention of not wasting time on sophomoric
discussions and not directly attacking persons. (attacking viewpoints is
fine, of course)
Thanks- I needed to get that off my chest.
I am not a scholar- I am a lay Baha'i definitely, but one with a passion
for teaching- but I really, really enjoy reading the postings of the scholars
on Talisman. I would appeal to those who share my sentiments to open some
discussions on viable topics that could be addressed by Talismanians.
A good topic, in my opinion, would be a discussion of "what is a philosopher
and where is her/his place in the Faith?" beginning with the quote in the
subject line- we begin with words, but how, on-line, do we not "end with
words"?
I would also welcome a discussion about the symbolism of 'Abdu'l-Baha's
Writings. Also more about translations and meanings of individual words
in the Writings (Arabic and Persian).
Since I'm mostly a reader, not a contributor, I feel a little funny
suggesting topics. But anyway, what about more on the dissertation topic
of martyrs?
Again, thanks for letting me get this off my chest.
Judy Russell
From iskandar@ns.moran.comTue Mar 26 17:57:45 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:15:26 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: The UnChristian Koran
I believe the verse refers to the time when Jews and Christians of Medina were secretly collaborating with the Meccan idolaters against Muhammad.
John Walbridge, Derek, Juan, or Ahang can correct me and shed a lot more light on the way Islam and the Quran views Christianity and Judaism.
Bye,
Iskandar
----------
From: belove@sover.net[SMTP:belove@sover.net]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 1996 9:49 PM
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The UnChristian Koran
Talking with a friend of mine about the World's Religions and why I am a Baha'i despite the mishagosh (Burl will translate) and I mentioned that Judaism and Christianity seemed, to me, when I was younger, to insist that I accept God and God's Messenger as manifested in "My Religion," but also deny the Messenger as manifested in "Their Religion." I said that Islam taught to accept them all. He opens my Koran to "The Table" verses 55 + and points out the following:
"Oh believers, take not Jews and Christians
as friends; they are friends of each other.
Whoso of you makes them his friends
is one of them. God guides not the people of the evildoers."
Well! I don't mind saying that I found this a very unChristian sentiment. If you know what I mean.
Can anyone explain this lack of Charity in the Koran?
Philip
From iskandar@ns.moran.comTue Mar 26 17:58:06 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:36:33 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: Imams and `Ulama
I would agree with John's reading of the Tablet: Baha'u'llah is, in my opinion, elaborating on the notion of Most Great Infallibility in this Tablet and that Shi-ites have, over the years, created this 14 infallible persons notion which puts the Imams on the same station as the Manifestation of God. He says this is joining partners with God (shirk); there are references to this concept in other Tablets such as Ishraqat and the Kitab-I-Aqdas.
With regards to His childhood memory of the Bani-Qurayza, He goes on to say that His heart was calmed when the wisdom of that act was revealed to Him.
Regards,
Iskandar Hai
----------
From: jwalbrid[SMTP:jwalbrid@indiana.edu]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 1996 4:55 PM
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Imams and `Ulama
"The revealers of the potency of His Word" seems to me to refer to the
Imams, rather than the clergy, although I could be wrong. The Shi`ite
golden age, the tablet seems to me to say, was the time of the imams,
after which the Shi`ites "corrupted the principle of His Divine
unity"--i.e., gave excessive veneration to beings other than God and His
prophet, which presumably is the Imams.

"The Person of the Manifestation hath ever been
the representative and mouthpiece of God. He, in
truth, is the Day Spring of God's most excellent
Titles, and the Dawning-Place of His exalted
Attributes. If any be set up by His side as peers, if
they be regarded as identical with His Person, how
can it, then, be maintained that the Divine Being is
One and Incomparable, that His Essence is indivisible
and peerless?"

This paragraph, I think, supports my reading of the tablet, since a near
deification of the imams is a feature of certain threads of later Shi`ism
(including the Bab, but that opens another issue).

There is a tradition in the Faith of criticizing the Shi`ite overemphasis
on the imams. Hujjat, for example, got in trouble for saying that the
bodies of the Imams were of the same nature as everybody else's. I can't
agree with Ahmad's reading of the Tablet. Anybody else wish to weigh in
on its meaning?

I will leave it to my good wife to comment on the relative veneration of
the imams and the ayatu'llahs in contemporary Shi`ism.

As for lack of charity in the Qur'an, Baha'u'llah talks in one of his
tablets about how upset he was as a child to read about the treatment of
the Jews of Medina in the time of the Prophet (some of them were executed
en masse).

john walbridge
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlTue Mar 26 17:58:43 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:28:22 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Imams and Ulama
John,
I also read Gleanings XXVIII as addressed to the general Shi`i tendency
to elevate leaders to a status approaching or even exceeding that of
Muhammad. Ahmad's argument falls down on an anachronism: he supposes
that the veneration of the imams goes back to the days of the imams
when the community was still adhering to the precepts associated with
the name of their Prophet. Baha'u'llah's objection is not to the existence
of those who reveal the potency of His Word, but the excessive veneration
of them. But when did the veneration of leaders (the imams
in the first case) reach a point when it could be said to corrupt the
'principle of His divine unity'? Could it be (ahem) with Ibn Arabi
and the Perfect Men, since in that category Manifestations and adepts
are brought together with a difference only of gradation? (corrections
especially welcome here) Or is the reference specifically to the *Divine*
unity, rather than the uniqueness of the Prophet, i.e., to those who
identified `Ali with God? The last of these would seem to be too specific,
and too evidently an aberration even in Shi`i Islam, to be what Baha'u'llah
had in mind here.
However the reference is specifically to a pristine period in *Shi`ih*
Islam, and its subsequent corruption by focussing attention on those who
were only the revealers of the potency of his word. Perhaps the answer can
be found by looking for a golden age in Shi`ih history?
My guess is that the 'pristine' period referred to is actually the mid-tenth
to mid-eleventh century CE, although the sixteenth century, with the rise of
the Safavid dynasty, would be another candidate if we look for a period of
victories and triumphs. The decline would then be marked by the rise of the
mujtahids in late Safavid Iran, since the spread of ijtihad had the effect of
elevating the supposed imam's opinions to the status of doctrines to which
assent was obligatory. I don't think this was the case earlier (?).
It is hard to see how those 'who were the revealers of the potency of His
Word' could be a reference to ulama or mujtahids, unless Baha'u'llah
is speaking sarcastically here. It must refer either to the Imams, as the
sources and transmitters of the hadith considered as revelation with a small
`r' or, as I think more likely, the reference is to the 14 Most Holy because
they in their own saintly selves show us the potential potency of God's Word
in transforming our lives. They thus 'reveal' His power without having access
themselves to the power of revelation. Which is also, as I understand it,
how we derive inspiration (small `i') from the Dawnbreakers and accounts
from the believers of the heroic age. There is a doctrinal 'thus far and no
further' which no religious community can cross without incurring the penalty
of the devaluation of the divine and thus dissipating its own source of
power. In the Baha'i case, Shoghi Effendi deals with this in the chapters on
`Abdu'l-Baha and the Administrative Order in The Dispensation of Baha'u'llah.
He refers to the excessive veneration of the Master and of the Guardian as
heretical (p121) and blasphemous, respectively.
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-3216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduTue Mar 26 17:59:16 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 08:45:12 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu, Judith Russel
Subject: no questioning.....
Dear Judith,
I congratualate you for your pioneering and deepening efforts.
However, I do have the following for you.
In the past twentyfive years,there have been wonderful conferences
all over U.S. and the globe to show our unity and to get friends
feeling good about it. We keep on telling people about the Message.
Then, when they come in they are told you cannot ask questions, you
have to learn to make
yourself happy, oneness is the fiction of your imagination when it
comes to taking care of the poor and needy in our communities. By the
demographics of the community you see that it is mostly, middle
class, white, anglosaxon. We are not allowed to be involved in the
organizations and issues that have a political nature, unless we
respond to the persecution of Baha'is in Iran.
In my community of almost a quarter of a century more people left
than came in.
The only thing you can do is support the fund, pray and fast and
fight your own spiritual battles. The latter everyone does regardless
of one's beliefs. Human beings cannot live with WORDS ALONE.
Large percentage of the American youth did not embrace the Faith.
The illnesses of society (so depressing that I will not go into
details) from racism, sexism, MATERIALISM, and classism inflicts
our communities as well. I think that the communities are under
tremendous stress. More is expected with less given in fellowship.
You cannot expect plants to yield more fruits, while they are
deprived of the necesssary nutrients, i.e. freedom, love, compassion,
understanding and the list goes on and on. We are wilted flowers in
one garden. I'm sure the flowers in China are more vibrant with even
less materials and social freedoms that we have here in U.S..
Tell us why they seem so much more warm, friendly caring. Also, be
aware that as an American you were treated differently. So, your
experience is not an indication of what goes on among all the people
in China. How do you feel about the Chinese slavery which provides
cheap material goods for us here? How did you feel about the
oppression of women? What about the brutal treatment of people by
their government? What about Tianamen?
So, one gets pretty depressed and being sophmoric is a way to deal
with the wounds. I too appreciate the serious discussions that
talisman provides. But, I also enjoy the less serious interactions.
Something I would have never been allowed to do otherwise, without
obvious and subtle sanctions in the form of social treatment.
I am including your messsage to make the points clearer.
***************************************************************
Date sent: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 23:10:01 -0700 (MST)
From: Judith Russel
To: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
Subject: Re: true seeker...
Dear Quanta,
I am recently back on talisman, and I read your question about the first
paragraph of the Tablet of the True Seeker.
I enjoy discussions about the Writings, and I always have opinions, some
formed seconds before they're spoken. One lesson I learned from Mrs. Khadem
at a talk at the Heartland Baha'i School several years ago is that no one,
no matter how authoritatively he/she speaks, has the right to interpret the
Writings for anyone else. Only the Master and the Guardian had the right
to enlarge upon the Revealed Word.
When people do this, I must remember this. Some people speak in this fashion
unknowingly and others for whatever reason insist on their interpretation
as "right" consciously. In protecting my own spiritual growth from any
emotional detours, I try to be detached when someone is very insistent.
And Baha'u'llah did not condone contention, in my opinion.
I'm glad to read your postings and wish you all the best.
Thanks for the opportunity to respond. Judy Russell
**************************************************************************
A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole
planet, freed from national hinderances and restrictions, and functioning
with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity.-Shoghi Effendi, 1936
From Wilgar123@aol.comTue Mar 26 17:59:33 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:50:22 -0500
From: Wilgar123@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Auschwitz
A seeker asked: "From a Baha'i point of view could God have prevented
Auschwitz?" Comments
Bill G
From HAI.ISKANDAR@FORUM.VA.GOVTue Mar 26 18:00:07 1996
Date: 26 Mar 96 10:00 EST
From: HAI.ISKANDAR@FORUM.VA.GOV
To: HAI.ISKANDAR@FORUM.VA.GOV, jrcole@UMICH.EDU, jwalbrid@INDIANA.EDU,
talisman@INDIANA.EDU
Subject: Baha'u'llah's childhood
The other day I was reading an article about Bah'u'llah's childhood in the
November 1995 issue of the Persian periodical "PayAm-i-Baha'i" written by
Nosratu'llah Muhammad-Huseini, Ph.D. The monthly periodical is published
by the NSA of France.
There is an abolutely marvellous and beautiful quote in that paper from a
Letter that Baha'u'llah wrote in His childhood to one of His relatives in
which He implied, rather explicitly, that He had innnate unlearned Divine
knowledge at that young and tender age. I had always believed that.
The source of the quote is said to be a manuscript collection
(NafahAt'l-Quds compilation) of the Writings in the hand-writing of the
Hand of the Cause Mr. Samandari. Does anyone know who the recepient of
that Letter was? Also, considering that it must have been revealed
sometime in the 1820's or early 1830's or so, does anyone know how it was
preserved all these years? A decade or two before the declaration of the
Bab? Has anybody seen this quote in some other manuscripts or sources?
Maybe Ahang, John, or Juan would be kind enough to translate it for us.
Here it is:
Howa'l-mahboob!
He is the well-beloved!
inshA'allAh dar sAyeh-i-rahmat-i- rahmAnI wa qibAb-i-inAyat-i-sobhAnI
sAkin wa mostarIh bAshId.
Bar hasab-i-zAhir, man kuchekam, khatt nadAram; wa lAkin chun In
ommy bi-sidrih-i-ilAhI motamassek ast, bI ilm mIkhAnad wa bI khatt
mInevisad; wa In dar Alam-i-bAtin nazd-i-ahl-i-basar mash-hood ast.
aghyAr az In sirr AgAh naboodih wa nIstand.

Forgive my transliteration; but wasn't it fascinating?
Lovingly,
Iskandar Hai
From jwinters@epas.utoronto.caTue Mar 26 18:00:25 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:19:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: M
Cc: talisman
Subject: Qur'an 4:34--other translations
The first thing that I would do in attempting to interpret that would be
to look at some other translations. I'll post three of these (but not the
Arabic).
004.034
YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because
Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because
they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are
devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah
would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear
disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to
share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return
to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is
Most High, great (above you all).
PICKTHAL: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one
of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property
(for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding
in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye
fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and
scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo!
Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.
SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some
of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property;
the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah
has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion,
admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat
them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely
Allah is High, Great.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
From nineteen@onramp.netTue Mar 26 18:00:56 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 09:39:13 -0500
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: Kevin , Talisman
Subject: re: UHJ, men, beginning with words, ending with -- ??
>The optimist in all of us desperately wants to believe that debates over
>subjects such as the permanence of women's ineligibility for membership on
>the Universal House of Justice, or the reason(s) for this
>ineligibility/exemption, or the acceptance (or not) of homosexual lifestyles
>within the Baha'i community, may potentially yield insights we can use
>constructively to fulfill the Baha'is' mission in the world.
>
>In reality, the dominant effect of such debates has been quite the opposite,
>at least in their occurences on Talisman. Far from increasing our
>effectiveness as champions of human dignity and equality, they entangle us in
>a web of partisanship and contention, isolating us from the pains most deeply
>felt by our fellow human beings.
Dear brother Kevin,
I hear what you are saying! Nevertheless, there are many friends with
questions that won't go away--that can't be swept under the rug, so to
speak. It is true that questions should be approached with courtesy and
we sometimes fail in this regard, but the friends must be allowed to
fail IMO because we must independently investigate this Cause and see for
ourselves the truth of things without restraint. Only then can questions
be put to rest. Some questions cannot be rationalized but they touch a
psychological nerve that is painful and must be expressed. Many of the
friends feel that Talisman is the only arena where they can be allowed to
express those thoughts that many members of the Baha'i community do not
care to explore and perhaps finds threatening.
It is theraputic for the friends to have a place where they are free to
express bold and challenging things and sometime reveal hidden thoughts
to an understanding audience or discuss thoughts that might provoke
disunity in their own community. THE RELEASE OF PAINFUL FEELINGS IS
HEALTHY. BITTERNESS CANNOT BE OVERCOME BY REPRESSION. Sometime the
friends are called upon to help each other and love each and that is all.
They need not judge or evaluate the significance of what is being said
beyong the quality of pain that imbues it. This is not to say that such
thearapy is successful, but it is right action for the sincere.
Richard
Richard C. Logan nineteen@onramp.net
Maintain HomePage "The Baha'is of Lubbock"
http://rampages.onramp.net/~nineteen/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How manifold are the truths which must remain unuttered until the
appointed time is come! Even as it has been said:
"Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can
everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every
timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who
hear it." --Gleanings from the writings of Baha'u'llah
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From lora@creighton.eduTue Mar 26 18:02:00 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:50:16 CST
From: Lora McCall
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Admin Order & Mashriq
Dear Talismanites,
We seem to be collapsing the Faith of Baha'u'llah into the
administrative order. The AO is not central to the Baha'i community,
and community does not equal administration.
The AO isn't an end in itself, it exists to support and protect the
Mashriqul-Adhkar and its dependencies. 'Abdu'l-Baha said the heart of
every believer and the heart of every community is the Mashriq. He
didn't say the AO is the heart. And further, the UHJ is not the
"central shrine" of our world. The fact that we haven't built more
Mashriqs throughout the lands as commanded by Baha'u'llah in the
Aqdas (#31) is certainly puzzling. What greater thing do we have to
offer? Administration is old news. We need the AO, but it is not
central to community life and meaning.
I agree with Linda that while "no harm is meant in suggesting that
that there is not 100% equality between men and women," in reality,
harm is being done, but is it MORE harm than is done when Baha'is
blithely accept that the AO is all we have to offer the world? No
wonder we don't attract a greater number of souls of capacity to
Baha'u'llah's Cause. People don't find meaning in administration,
but we do find it in worship and service, the very definition of
Mashriqul-Adhkar.
Linda says: "In a religion where administration has really become
its central feature, it is not easy to justify excluding women
from any level of it. [snip] As we are told repeatedly, everything
has to go through the administrative order, yet at its highest
level, women cannot be represented."
Administration is *not* the central feature of the Faith of
Baha'u'llah, and everything does not have to go through the AO. If
this were true, the UHJ would not be advising us to use grass roots
tactics to build communities, and they would not be encouraging
individual initiative or telling us that the Faith of Baha'u'llah is
not so fragile that it can't withstand a few mistakes. It seems they
are trying to lovingly wean us from our exaggerated dependence on
them. I don't hear them telling us to sit around and wait for them
to tell us every move to make.
And further, I don't care that women are exempt from serving on the
UHJ. Service on the House is NOT the pinnacle experience for any
Baha'i -- male or female. "...close and daily communion with those
spiritual agencies centering in and radiating from the central
Shrine of the Mashriqul-Adhkar" is. It is through this communion
that all our efforts as individuals, as communities, and as
administrators (if we happen to be serving in that capacity)
"fructify and prosper". [Quotes are from the Guardian, Baha'i
Administration, p 186]
It is in the Mashriqul-Adhkar and all its dependencies that women
and men are truly equal (but not the *same*) -- equal in our duties,
rights, responsibilities, and for receiving blessings, and equal in
our access to the One True God. Service on the UHJ (or any
administrative body) does not increase an individual's access
to God, or his rights as a Baha'i.
It is in building and celebrating in Houses of Worship, those central
shrines of the Mashriqul-Adhkar, that Baha'is will find meaning,
opportunities for service, and most importantly, something to give
the world that it doesn't already have.
Warmly,
Lora McCall
From jwalbrid@indiana.eduTue Mar 26 18:02:43 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 11:07:47 -0500 (EST)
From: jwalbrid
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Translation of tablet on Baha'u'llah's childhood
Howa'l-mahboob!
He is the well-beloved!
inshA'allAh dar sAyeh-i-rahmat-i- rahmAnI wa qibAb-i-inAyat-i-sobhAnI
sAkin wa mostarIh bAshId.
Bar hasab-i-zAhir, man kuchekam, khatt nadAram; wa lAkin chun In
ommy bi-sidrih-i-ilAhI motamassek ast, bI ilm mIkhAnad wa bI khatt
mInevisad; wa In dar Alam-i-bAtin nazd-i-ahl-i-basar mash-hood ast.
aghyAr az In sirr AgAh naboodih wa nIstand.
He is the well beloved.
God willing, you are residing and at rest beneath the shadow the mercy of
the All-Merciful and within the pavillion of the exalted providence.
Outwardly I am a child and cannot not write, yet since this illiterate one
clings to the divine tree without knowledge I read and without knowing
how I write. This is apparent in the hidden world to the people of
insight. Others were and are unaware of this mystery.
As to the date of this tablet, I would want to see the manuscript and
know something about where it comes from. The "naboodih wa nIstand" is a
characteristically Babi grammatical form, which would seem to date it
in the Babi period. Ahang, do you know about this text?
john walbridge
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduTue Mar 26 18:02:56 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 11:56:00 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: beating women...
Oh! No! Don't you get me started on this one, now. I ain't gonna know
if I am the simpleton Kwantuh, or the "excelled above everything" name
that my dad gave me "....". This is the most indefensable teaching
of Islam. Now, I like to know what experts say on this one.
Also, remember what is going on with women in Brazil and other latin
countries. Remember that the law in Belgium and other places still
exists that a man can beat his wife with a stick as thick as the
thumb and get away with it. Think of what is happening to women in
India, China and Africa and all over the globe.
Study the statistics of domestic violence in the United States.
Get a life and give me a break. Why are you picking on moslems only,
if you are truly concerned with the plight of women in general?
I can guarantee you that there are Baha'i men who are also oppressor.
What are your "deeds", not knowledge of "words" in educating men
and healing the wounds caused by the violence committed
against the millions of women in the world?? That'll help!!
q.
**************************************************************************
A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole
planet, freed from national hinderances and restrictions, and functioning
with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity.-Shoghi Effendi, 1936
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduTue Mar 26 18:03:20 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 12:01:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: lora@creighton.edu
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Admin Order & Mashriq
> .............................. The fact that we haven't built more
> Mashriqs throughout the lands as commanded by Baha'u'llah in the
> Aqdas (#31) is certainly puzzling. ................................
Lora, Allah'u'Abha! I don't have the quote, but I was told that the Guardian
at one point suggested that given the limited numbers and resources in the
Baha'i community the time was not yet right for building Mashriq'u'l Adhkars.
This point may have come up in the earlier discussions on this topic--does
anyone have the quote(s)?
On a related point, I was interested to see the plans for the Ann Arbor -
Ypsilanti area Baha'i center, which incorporates a shape which will allow its
eventual transformation into a Mashriq (4/9 of a nonogon foundation + what is
presumably a short-medium term square structure). Interesting way to actualize
the meeting of current needs with current resources and the basis for a future
Mashriq. "At the outset of every endeavor it is incumbent to look to the end
of it."
Don Osborn osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
From osborndo@pilot.msu.eduTue Mar 26 18:03:35 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 12:13:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Donald Zhang Osborn
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: jwsuggs@aol.com
Subject: You are what you do?
Allah'u'Abha! The attached concerning the effect of communications and our
behavior on our very being would seem to have interesting implications for
discussion of aspects of what we commonly refer to as "human nature" (beyond
nature vs. nurture). Also implications for the transformative effect of
putting into practice the Baha'i teachings. DZO osborndo@pilot.msu.edu
Forwarded message:
> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 09:08:13 -0500
> From: Peter Pflaum
> Subject: For a real change -
> To: Multiple recipients of list INTDEV-L
>
> SYNERGY-NET on http://metro.turnpike.net/~pflaump
>
> RE: Bio-politics, education and the Chemical-behavioral paradigm:
> Domination and Liberation.
>
> It is good practice to design organizational, political,
> educational, training, and commercial activity with knowledge of
> the "newest" findings of social psychology, and the most
> "ancient" methods of character development. In times of change,
> it become necessary to think of ways to promote "reprogrammed"
> individuals and systems. We are in the area of great change as we
> move from industrial models of domination to information systems
> and cooperation. Fundamental change is not so simple and the
> evolution of culture has never been so fast. We need new
> techniques to deal we this kind of challenge. There is no
> solution "inside the box", we have to look beyond our culturally
> defined ruts.
>
> Candace Pert, interviewed in Bill Moyers' "Healing and the Mind"
> (Doubleday 1995 based on the PBS series) was Chief of Brain Bio-
> chemistry at the NIH. She discovered new types of psychoactive
> drugs that are produced by the brain, endorphins, which means
> "morphines from within", that are similar to opiates taken as
> drugs.
>
> The physical matter changes with personality. It goes both ways.
> " the mind is not just in the brain but is part of a
> communications network throughout the brain and body. You can
> start to see how physiology can effect functioning on a moment-
> to-moment, hour-by-hour, day-today basis, much more that we give
> it credit for." If people live in an industrial, factory system,
> where domination, power, and control are the commanding social
> conditions, they become physically different from people who work
> and live in an information, learning organization. The workers of
> Detroit have different bio-chemical systems than those of San
> Jose and the silicon valley. Different groups of voters have
> different chemical reactions to the symbols, sights and sounds of
> political messages.
>
> As a neuroscientist Dr. Pert was `secretly' interested in
> consciousness and became aware that the immune system produces a
> number psychosomatic (psyche = mind, soma = body ) chemical
> transmitters. The internal information system is a biochemical,
> electrical network. The messenger peptides inform and stimulate
> cells to produce or not produce proteins, divide or not divide,
> and the direct the roles of different sub-systems in complex
> strategies of growth, protection, and mood. The fight-flight
> (stress response) is only one of many sub-systems. (Herbert
> Benson)
>
> Consciousness involves every cell of the body.
>
> Try to get your "mind" around this concept. Thinking and
> awareness is NOT a computer chip but a chemical soup, dynamic
> interactions on bio-chemical networks, not programmed but
> conditioned by genes and the physical, social environment.
> Genetic context is interactive with `ecological' emotional and
> social states. Neuro-peptides and their receptors are emotions.
>
> This new science opens doors to "body knowledge", intuition, and
> the deep programming of socialization. Television and diet impact
> who we are. Commercials, sex and violence, effect mood by way of
> organic chemistry. Bio-politics speaks to the production of
> Neuro-transmitters.
>
> The peptides are the material manifestation of the psyche and the
> "soul". Anger, love, fear, awe, depression, joy, are physical and
> material body reactions. Actors that play happy people have
> different blood chemistry from actors that play angry people.
> Thinking makes it happen, body chemistry effects our thinking.
> Psychol-therapy, or traditional education maybe able to change
> our patterns of thought to produce new chemical balances, but its
> very difficult and unlikely. But if drugs can change the
> chemistry - bingo our own attitude changes.
>
> "People with multiple personalities sometimes have extremely
> clear physical symptoms that vary with each personality. One
> personality can be allergic to cats while another is not. One
> personality can be diabetic and another is not."
>
> Neuro-peptides are the biochemical units of emotion. Emotions
> almost always set the context for behavior. Perhaps, industrial
> and social training need to take place with sets of conditions
> that produce the responses needed. Construction, decoration and
> graphics, sights and sounds, diet, motion, all can contribute.
> Maybe also "soma", drugs that produce a sense of security, well-
> being and hope. This is the base of our Sufi program.
>
> The old systems of power and top-down authority (Male domination
> systems) have become more and more dysfunctional. Public schools
> are the great hold-outs of "communist", state bureaucracies that
> ignore market forces. IBM, GM, and the other industrial giants
> are making way for smaller, faster, more flexible cooperative
> systems of enterprise. The US congress with it's domination by
> old men, committee chairmen, no longer works. Big
> "communications" mega-media is coming apart at the edges.
>
> SYNERGY-NET on http://metro.turnpike.net/~pflaump
> ** Peter E. Pflaum Ph.D. , Headmaster GLOBAL_VILLAGE_SCHOOLHOUSE
> 225 Robinson Road, New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169-2176 (904) 428-9609
> pflaump@MSN.com pflaump@interserv.com
> *****************************************************************
>
> SYNERGY-NET on http://emporium.turnpike.net/~pflaump or
> http://metro.turnpike.net/~pflaum pflaume@n-jcenter.com
> ** Peter E. Pflaum Ph.D. , Headmaster GLOBAL_VILLAGE_SCHOOLHOUSE
> 225 Robinson Road, New Smyrna Beach, FL 32169-2176 (904) 428-9609
> pflaump@interserv.com
> *****************************************************************
>
--
From lwalbrid@indiana.eduTue Mar 26 18:04:22 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 12:52:50 -0500 (EST)
From: lwalbrid
To: talisman@majordomo.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: imams
One of the hot debates among Islamist types these days is how much
devotion to bestow upon the imams. The real modernist types - ones that
want reform throughout the system and who include Muslim feminists -
laugh at the ideas put forwad about the infallibility and the purity of
the imams. They are embarassed that their co-religionists believe that,
for example, even the urine of the imams is pure and that Fatima never
menstruated. The real venerators of the imams are the Shaykhis and,
since they seem to have money, their approach to the imams seems as if it
is being promoted. I need to check into this issue more.
However, I would agree with my husband that Baha'u'llah was warning
people against over-veneration of the imams. And, we are not immune from
this type of problem. Our imaginations run wild. We like to think that
because someone is holy that he is absolutely perfect and infallible in
every way. In other words, our fantacies get in the way of our reason.
And, Sen, I don't buy this "golden age" stuff.
And, Lora, I couldn't agree with you more about the proper place of
administration. I was simply talking about the way things have evolved
in the community. Your posting was great.
And, Richard, I can't believe it, but I am leaving town after reading a
posting of yours that I agree with!
Be back in ten days or so.
John, beam me up and unsubscribe. Linda
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comTue Mar 26 18:05:12 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 11:02:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: RE: Translation of tablet on Baha'u'llah's childhood
[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
John,
A very nice translation. And thanks to Iskandar for sharing this
Tablet, which I for one had not seen before.
It seems there are two possibilities for dating this Tablet:
1. early to mid Baghdad period when Baha'u'llah was still in
touch with His family and presumably influenced by the Bab's
grammar (as noted by John's very insightful comment about
"naboodih va nistand");
2. a very late Tablet, perhaps during the last couple years of
His life. I've noted (and this a very tentative theory, based
on admittedly limited evidences) that during the last few years
of Baha'u'llah's life, occasionally His Mazandarani dialect would
slip through -- for the rest of His Writings, one doesn't detect
any dialect, but there are a few instances in His final years.
The reason that I raise this is that "naboodih va nistand" may
also be read as Mazandarani saying. Also, last few years was the
time that He was fond of reminiscing about His early years.
So, if I was a betting man, I would say its a very late Tablet as
opposed to Babi period. Besides, we're almost certain that
nothing of His Writings prior to 1853 has survived.
Iskandar jan, does Muhammad-Husayni say any more about this
manuscript collection in the hand of Samandari? (I should also
point out that Jinab-i Samandari was not known for his erudition
and had limited linguistic training, so I would be cautious of
Tablets in his hand and would want to see another manuscript for
confirmation.) Also, does Muhammad-Husayni put forth any
reasoning for the claim that the Tablet was written in 1820's or
1830's?
Could we get Cole/Lambden to emerge from their occultation to
comment?
regards, ahang.
From jwinters@epas.utoronto.caTue Mar 26 18:07:25 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:22:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Jonah Winters
To: M
Cc: talisman
Subject: Quran 4:34
One little interpretation, one commonly given by apologetes but
perhaps not historically accurate, is that the meaning is that you can
beat them, not just with a stick the thickness of the thumb, but with one
the size of the thumb. Since this would be not a beating at all, but a
farce, the point is that, if you beat women, you make a fool of yourself.
But like I say, that's just an apologetic interpretation.
-J
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jonah and Kari Winters
33 Endean Avenue / Toronto, Ontario / M4M-1W5 / (416) 461-3527
From dan_orey@qmbridge.ccs.csus.eduTue Mar 26 18:07:59 1996
Date: 26 Mar 96 10:41:28 U
From: Dan Orey
To: jrussell@bsl1.bslnet.com, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: re: UHJ, men, beginning
Reply to: RE>re: UHJ, men, beginning wit
Welcome back - be patient, talisman seems to go up and down, just like any long
time relation or freindship. Sometimes we are very scholarly, other times we
are goofy. Sometimes we fight, sometimes we even make - up. kinda like a big
over extended global family. - Daniel
From HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.govTue Mar 26 18:08:20 1996
Date: 26 Mar 96 14:06 EST
From: HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.gov
To: HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.gov, lwalbrid@indiana.edu,
owner-talisman@indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: imams
{Original Msg: 'imams' from
{
{One of the hottest debates among Islamist types currently is the station
{of the imams in Shi'ism. The real modernists who want reform at all
{levels (this includes Islamic feminists)
{laugh at the ideas put forwad about the infallibility and the purity of
{the imams. They are embarassed that their co-religionists believe that,
{for example, even the urine of the imams is pure and that Fatima never
{menstruated. The real venerators of the imams are the Shaykhis and,
{since they seem to have money, their approach to the imams seems as if it
{is being promoted. I need to check into this issue more.
{
{However, I would agree with my husband that Baha'u'llah was warning
{people against over-veneration of the imams. And, we are not immune from
{this type of problem. Our imaginations run wild. We like to think that
{because someone is holy that he is absolutely perfect and infallible in every
{since they seem to have money, their approach to the imams seems as if it
{people against over-veneration of the imams. And, we are not immune from
{every way. In other words, our fantacies get in the way of our reason.
{
{And, Sen, I don't buy this "golden age" stuff.
{
{And, Lora, I couldn't agree with you more about the proper place of
{administration. I was simply talking about the way things have evolved
{in the communitmore about the proper place of
{administration. I was simply talking about the way things have evolved
{in the community. Your posting was great.
{
{And, Richard, I can't believe it, but I am leaving town after reading a
{posting of yours that I agree with!
{
{Be back in ten days or so.
{
{John, beam me up and unsubscribe. Linda
{

Baha'u'llah seems to venerate Imam Husayn quite significantly in the Iqan.
It is the idea of joining partners with the Manifestation of God (i.e.,
joining partners with God) that Baha'u'llah rejects.
Bye,
Iskandar

************************************************************************
Iskandar Hai, M.D.
************************************************************************
From L. Tue Mar 26 18:08:40 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 20:02:02 +0100 (MET)
From: L.
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: beating women...
Not quite, my dear. Some time ago Belgium passed a law that a certain
percentage of national elected positions had to go to women. Since then
much has changed. The national parliament is currently voting through a
strong law against domestic violence. There were previous laws, but this one
is to make sure that the police don't let cases slip through the cracks. It
will be obligatory to prosecute. (I have not read the text of the law, this
is what the newscasters said.)
Sincerely,
L. (from Belgium)
> Remember that the law in Belgium and other places still
>exists that a man can beat his wife with a stick as thick as the
>thumb and get away with it.
P.S. Lots of problems still exist, though, e.g. sexual slavery.
From HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.govTue Mar 26 18:09:14 1996
Date: 26 Mar 96 14:14 EST
From: HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.gov
To: HAI.ISKANDAR@forum.va.gov, jwalbrid@indiana.edu,
owner-talisman@indiana.edu, talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Translation of Tablet on Baha'u'llah's childhood
{Original Msg: 'RE: Translation of tablet on Baha'u'llah's childhood' from
{
{[This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII]
{
{John,
{
{A very nice translation. And thanks to Iskandar for sharing this
{Tablet, which I for one had not seen before.
{
{It seems there are two possibilities for dating this Tablet:
{
{1. early to mid Baghdad period when Baha'u'llah was still in
{touch with His family and presumably influenced by the Bab's
{grammar (as noted by John's very insightful comment about
{"naboodih va nistand");
{
{2. a very late Tablet, perhaps during the last couple years of
{His life. I've noted (and this a very tentative theory, based
{on admittedly limited evidences) that during the last few years
{of Baha'u'llah's life, occasionally His Mazandarani dialect would
{slip through -- for the rest of His Writings, one doesn't detect
{any dialect, but there are a few instances in His final years.
{The reason that I raise this is that "naboodih va nistand" may
{also be read as Mazandarani saying. Also, last few years was the
{time that He was fond of reminiscing about His early years.
{
{So, if I was a betting man, I would say its a very late Tablet as
{opposed to Babi period. Besides, we're almost certain that
{nothing of His Writings prior to 1853 has survived.
{
{Iskandar jan, does Muhammad-Husayni say any more about this
{manuscript collection in the hand of Samandari? (I should also
{point out that Jinab-i Samandari was not known for his erudition
{and had limited linguistic training, so I would be cautious of
{Tablets in his hand and would want to see another manuscript for
{confirmation.) Also, does Muhammad-Husayni put forth any
{reasoning for the claim that the Tablet was written in 1820's or
{1830's?
{
{Could we get Cole/Lambden to emerge from their occultation to
{comment?
{
{regards, ahang.
{

Dr. Muhammad-Husayni does not elaborate on the manuscript; he just cites
it in the footnote as the source for the Letter; neither does he say that
it was revealed in the 1820's or 30's.
However, the text of the Letter clearly states that He is a child (kuchik)
which makes it very interesting; if it had been revealed in Baghdad (when
He was in His late 30's) or in Akka (when He was in His 60's or 70's), the
Tablet would not have been that dramatic, would it.
Anyway, it would be interesting to know if other people have seen this in
other manuscripts; or maybe the World Centre can look for it.
With regards to the style: I guess the "naboodih wa nIstand" or
"boodih wa hast" occurs in many of Baha'u'llah's writings not necessarily
any particular time frame; but then again I am not an expert on
Baha'u'llah's style of writing, either.
Respectfully,
Iskandar

************************************************************************
Iskandar Hai, M.D.
************************************************************************
From forumbahai@es.co.nzTue Mar 26 18:10:38 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 07:39 GMT+1300
From: Alison & Steve Marshall
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: George Bernard Shaw - the unreasonable man
George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
-----------------------------
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the
unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world
to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the
unreasonable man.
'Reason'
I came across a reference to George Bernard Shaw's "unreasonable man"
recently and looked up the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations to find the
reference. For some reason, the quote made me think of Talisman. :-)
ka kite,
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alison and Steve Marshall
Email: forumbahai@es.co.nz
90 Blacks Road, Opoho, Dunedin/Otepoti, Aotearoa/New Zealand
"Dunedin: the Riviera of the Antarctic"
--------------------------------------------------------------
From Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.comTue Mar 26 18:11:22 1996
Date: 26 Mar 1996 13:48:04 GMT
From: "Don R. Calkins"
To: nineteen@onramp.net
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Talisman as a therapy group
> It is theraputic
I suppose we could make talisman a group therapy list officially. It seems
to have devolved into that anyway. I tho't when I subscribed that this was
supposed to be a forum for scholarly consultation. Big Joke.
The issue of the expression of feelings and consultation was addressed by the
memorandum, 'Issues Concerning Community Functioning' prepared by the
Research Department of the Universal House of Justice, and sent at the
request of the House to at least the U.S. NSA, who subsequently published it
in the American Baha'i and sent copies to all U.S. LSA's. I believe it is
now available in print form, and an etext version originally posted on the
BNCBBS in Willmette has been being passed around for 18 months at least. I
recommend it's study for insight on many of the issues bro't up on talisman,
and the proper response of individuals to the May 1994 letter to the U.S. NSA
from the House that has produced so much controversy. A major point in this
memorandum is that the purpose of therapy is to effect healing or change a
habitual behavior and the purpose of consultation is to discover the truth.
They go on to say -
It is important to note that truth emerges after the "clash" of
carefully articulated views (which may well be expressed with
enthusiasm and vigour), not from the clash of feelings. A clash of
feelings is likely to obscure the truth, while a difference of
opinion facilitates the discovery of truth.
It is my belief that most of the emotional outbursts and clashes on talisman
as well as other forums on and off the 'net are the result of egotistical
materialism, in which the individual value themselves according to the
perceived response of others to their feelings and ideas. There are those in
the secular world who claim that even this can be cured with the proper
therapy. Personally, I believe it to be an essentially spiritual problem
which will disappear only with the nearness to God bro't about by prayer and
meditation. As Baha'u'llah says in one of His prayers, 'What power can the
shadowy figure claim to possess when face to face with Him Who is the
uncreated'.
Don C
He who believes himself spiritual proves he is not - The Cloud of Unknowing
From jarmstro@sun1.iusb.eduTue Mar 26 18:11:36 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 15:10:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Jackson Armstrong-Ingram
To: L.
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: new prayer
On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, L. wrote:
> As I photocopied the prayer for personal use, I photocopied the whole page,
> but then cut out just the prayer and the sentence saying it was translated
> by Shoghi Effendi. It did not come from England as I have not read any of
> their early journals. If you wish to verify that it is the same translation,
> then repost the original message to my private e-mail address and I will
> check it against the photocopy. Unfortunately I do not have time to try and
> find the page I photocopied in *Star of the West*.
>
Too bad. I have done the same kind of thing myself and it always seem
that the scrap of paper that you _did not_ mark a source on is the one
you want a source for later. There is no need to take any further
trouble. I will check Star next time I have access to a set. Thanks.
Jackson
From nightbrd@humboldt1.comTue Mar 26 18:11:48 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 12:22:31 -0800
From: Doug Myers
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Auschwitz
On Tue, 26 Mar 1996 Bill wrote:
>A seeker asked: "From a Baha'i point of view could God have prevented
>Auschwitz?" Comments
> Bill G
*Could* God have prevented Auschwitz? The short, simple answer is --- God
can do
anything, so, yes He *could* have? BUT the real question is WHY should He? Why
should God prevent the horrific events that happen to humanity? I can't
think of a
good reason.
What is the purpose of this existence we call "life" in this world we call
"reality"? In
the first paragraph of the Kitab-i-Aqdas God calls for the recognition of and
obedience to the Manifestation of God --- namely in this day Baha'u'llah ---
and that
these "duties" are inseparable. By so recognizing Baha'u'llah and following His
guidance, or for that matter any other Manifestation, we will follow a path
that will
not lead to Auschwitz. By humanity having trod the path of Auschwitz is
among the
surest signs that, as Baha'u'llah says in paragraphs 122 through 126 of the
Kitab-i-Aqdas (the Tablet of True Liberty) that men are a flock of sheep in
need of
the guidance of God.
Well, if men need the guidance of God why doesn't God just lead us to joy and
happiness? Why do we have freewill? Because it is freewill that enables God to
determine if I am to classed among the gold of among the dross of humanity.
To my
mind, there is no purpose to an All-powerful Creator having souls worship
Him who
have no choice in the matter, i.e. slaves. Since there is no heaven or hell
in the terms
we are raised to believe in Christian American culture, but rather Light and the
absence of Light, there must be a contrast so the difference can be seen.
On page 310
of Gleanings Baha'u'llah writes: "If none be found to stray from Thy path, how,
then, can the ensign of Thy mercy be unfurled, or the banner of Thy
bountiful favour
be hoisted?" (read the rest of the paragraph --- it is not cold and cruel
but goes on to
speak of the love, mercy, and compassion of God).
Or in the Kitab-i-Iqan, page 8 - 9 where Baha'u'llah writes: "Meditate
profoundly,
that the secret of things unseen may be revealed unto you, that you may
inhale the
sweetness of a spiritual and imperishable fragrance, and that you may
acknowledge
the truth that from time immemorial even unto eternity the Almighty hath
tried, and
will continue to try, His servants, so that light may be distinguished from
darkness,
truth from falsehood, right from wrong, guidance from error, happiness from
misery,
and roses from thorns."
As to the importance of this world, consider page 209 in gleanings: "Had
the world
been of any worth in His sight, He surely would never have allowed His
enemies to
possess it, even to the extent of a grain of mustard seed."
To me these thoughts and many more that corroborated them tell me that as
sickening and grotesque Auschwitz is it was a necessary part of the process of
bringing humanity to the point of coming to its collective knees and asking
for the
guidance and mercy of God. That day cannot come too soon for me. I can no
longer
look at the pictures of Auschwitz or the modern incarnations in Africa,
Europe, and
other places without becoming ill over man's inhumanity to his brothers and
sisters,
fathers and mothers, sons and daughters. I have seen too much --- now I can
only
say a prayer, teach the Cause of God, and trust in God.
Doug Myers
nightbrd@humboldt1.com
"Nothing survives but the way we live our lives." JB
Doug Myers
nightbrd@humboldt1.com
"Nothing survives but the way we live our lives." JB
From gjavedan@erols.comTue Mar 26 18:14:11 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:07:27 +0000
From: "Guity Javedan, Ramin Javedan"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Does anyone know?
Dear friends,
If anyone on Talisman knows the answer to this question, I would be
joyfully appreciative if they would send it to my own e-mail address,
gjavedan@mail.erols.com (I am not on the Talisman "network".)
Does anyone know what specific subject of advanced academic studies is
referred to in this excerpt of a House of Justice letter which cites a
letter from the Guardian. This excerpt is taken from the full excerpt
Number 50 of the World Centre Research Department's Compilation on
Scholarship:
"It is useful to review a number of statements written by Shoghi
Effendi on this subject. To a believer who had completed advanced
academic studies in a subject related to the Teachings the Guardian
stated, in a letter written on his behalf:
'It is hoped that all the Baha'i students will follow the noble
example you have set before them and will, henceforth, be led to
investigate and analyse the principles of the Faith and to correlate
them with the modern aspects of philosophy and science. Every
intelligent and thoughtful young Baha'i should always approach the
Cause in this way, for therein lies the very essence of the principle
of independent investigation of truth.' "
(Excerpt from Universal House of Justice 19 October 1993 to an
individual believer)
Thank you all so much for any either exact or clue-like answer you can
provide.
Allah'u'abha.
Ramin Javedan
From PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.eduTue Mar 26 18:16:53 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 12:45:14 PST8PDT
From: "Eric D. Pierce"
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: stilled voices (compassion and acceptance)/ was re: UHJ, men,..
Hi,
I'm emerging (for a few minutes) from the underwhelming obscurity
of working on a 50 part statistical report for the feds that is
over deadline in order to comment on brother Kevin's remarks:
> From: Geocitizen@aol.com (Kevin Haines)
> Date sent: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 02:53:45 -0500
> To: talisman@indiana.edu
> Subject: re: UHJ, men, beginning with words, ending with -- ??
>
> Robert and Jim have made some telling points in the last several days.
Yes.
>
> The optimist in all of us desperately wants to believe that debates over
> subjects such as the permanence of women's ineligibility for membership on
> the Universal House of Justice, or the reason(s) for this
> ineligibility/exemption, or the acceptance (or not) of homosexual lifestyles
> within the Baha'i community, may potentially yield insights we can use
> constructively to fulfill the Baha'is' mission in the world.
>
> In reality, the dominant effect of such debates has been quite the opposite,
> at least in their occurences on Talisman. Far from increasing our
> effectiveness as champions of human dignity and equality, they entangle us in
> a web of partisanship and contention, isolating us from the pains most deeply
> felt by our fellow human beings.
>
> Talisman could be a powerful source of insights on many subjects vital to the
> well-being of humanity, but these fruitless debates have effectively
> neutralized Talisman's potential.
>
Maybe it is the warm fuzzy exhausted feeling and mental fog
caused by overwork and waking up last night from 3am to 5am to
take care of a sick 2-1/2 year old, but I think the above is
going a bit far. I agree with Linda that Sir Richard has made
an effective counterpoint (healing process), and as a fellow
"pained one", wanted to expand a bit.
Are we really "desperate"? I think not. The desparate are the
ones that are starving in the world, or as Dr. Harrison points
out, those children ignored by the establishment whose brothers
are dying on the streets, etc. etc. etc.
I can't see lumping those of us that have the leisure to engage
in hoity-toity Baha'i chitchat on the internet with the truly
desperate.
I don't know about the "dominant effect" on the others here of
"desperately wanting" the "fruitless debates" to "potentially
yield insights we can use constructively" , but will speak for
myself (for whatever that is worth!).
First, to reiterate my experience with the politics of "Baha'i
culture", I too have some deep concerns over the tendency to form
camps, especially as an expression of a tendency toward
dysfunctional reactionary behaviour (powerlessness/victimization)
by minority/countercultural elements of the community. I guess
Tony Lee (impugning personal motives?) and Terry Culhane (dangerous
psychological metaphors that paper over injustices?) are critical
of this line of thinking, but we haven't had a chance to fully
explore the issue (at least to my simple minded way of thinking)
satisfactorily.
On the other hand, it seems to me that as a "natural" part of the
subcultural/intellectual landscape in an young, rapidly evolving
multinational, multicultural religious community, there has to be
a greater comfort level around a wide spectrum of more or less
acceptable views on controversial subjects. What the heck does
that mean?
I not sure, but seeing the debates here _is_ discouraging in the
sense that there is such a lack of *consensus* toward unity of
action/vision, but _is_ encouraging in that greater knowledge of,
and tolerance for, a wide spectrum of views and life experiences
is perhaps being learned.
After finally hearing from the frequently stilled or ignored
voices in our midst, I certainly feel that I am now *capable* of
a greater sense of compassion and acceptance of gays, women,
intellectuals and (yes!) even conservatives than I was before.
Maybe I'm deluding myself and lulling myself in to complacency,
but I think we can remain legitimately vigilant about
"disunifying" tendencies and still celebrate the froth, bubble
and ironies of an open diverse community of opinion and discourse.
Sorry for *actually* being sort of happy about talisman,
Eric D. Pierce
(PierceED@csus.edu)
Sacramento
ps, also sorry for not fully introducing and paying homage to
my great old friend Chris English, writer, agriculturalist, and
professional student of Native American culture. He is truly a
dear, insightful and wonderful fellow of big heart and soul whose
river of spirit river runs deep and strong. I'm sure he will make
some very unique and worthy contributions here when he gets his
talis-bearings.
From bryan.graham@pembroke.oxford.ac.ukTue Mar 26 18:18:20 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:14:20 +0000 (GMT)
From: Bryan Graham
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities (fwd)
Jim Harrison has made several posts regarding the above topic - making
several important points. We exchanged letters off the list however, I
thought it might be worth sharing my comments with everyone.
************************************************************************
Dear Jim,
In many respects you and share similar views. Let me again comment on a
few of you points, in your last letter.
> I am not insensitive to the difficulties this can bring up at times. But the
> challenge is with the seeker after truth, not with the vehicle that is
> delivering the message. The Faith has nothing to apologize for.
I too am wary of campaigning. However as you say this issue is
problematic. The exact nature of the World Order of Baha'u'llah has yet
to hammered out (obviously), however I think any successful
administrative process involves communication/consultation between
levels. For example in our LSA teaching plans etc. are improved by
rectifying the short-comings of previous ones - and it is the "duty" of
each individual believer to share his/her knowledge about how this can
be. Just as the footsoldier must inform the general of changes on the
battlefront but ultimately obey the commands of his leader.
> If we are
> that embarrassed because our Faith doesn't seem to conform to present
> societal norms then there have, I think, more profound questions that need to
> be asked. If it seems to contradict the issue of equality I think we might
> all do well to investigate our present perceptions of what equality truly is.
I think this perspective has been under-emphasized in the discussion.
Like you say the Faith has nothing to apologize for.
> I don't see Faith being strengthend by continiously (as has happened
> here on Talisman) chasing our tails on this issue. This process, again
> euphemistically described as *continued debate and exploration* is nothing
> more than an extremely thin veil hiding egos that cannot stand being denied.
As for the utility of this discussion I don't have an opinion about its
motivation. I do know that this is a difficult issue for some people and
if discussing it helps them gain a better understanding of it then so be
it. If "research" can help shed new light on the issue then I think its
important that people share their insights. As a recent posting noted the
House envisions a system whereby it can modify its decisions based on (1)
changed circumstances and (2) new information. Certainly the individual
and the NSA/LSA have a role to play in both these areas.
> The House is not a part of a legislative process. It is the Source of it.
I suspect my understanding is pretty clear on this issue. The House is
the body, that through the Covenant of Baha'u'llah, we have all sworn
obedience two. Obedience is part of the process of making the
adminstrative order function. However consultation is another component
of its smooth operations. For example the NSA of the United States has,
in recent years, consulted with the House on issues pertaining to the
unique characteristics of the American Baha'i community (some of which
you have alluded too). This consultation (I assume) helps to guide the
NSA and enlightens the House as to the problems/conditions it faces and
thus improves their guidance as well. I think the same holds true in the
relationship between say the individual/scholar and the institutions.
Scholarship can expand our understanding of the Faith, its writings, its
Laws, its precepts etc (this has been affirmed by Baha'u'llah and
especially the Master and The Guardian). If Scholarship has unearthed
something that warrants a re-evaluation of our "beliefs" or "legislation"
then it is imperative that we respond. Remember the House has affirmed
that it can respond to changed circumstances AND new information.
> When we look back at the history of religion one of the first things we see,
> esp. as Baha'is, the major blunders each of the previous religions made when
> they bowed to the pressure of the cultural norms.
I agree - we must prepare the world for the Message of Baha'u'llah and
not the Message of Baha'u'llah for the World. However, we all live in
this world (as you have implied) and thus there is a need to evaluate the
teachings from its perspective - this process helps us apply them
productively. For example I am an economist (or an aspiring one!) and
thus am interested in what type of economic situation is compatible and
envisioned with/by the writings. Economists have made a great deal of
progress over the past 200 years in their understanding of issues such as
growth and the allocation of resources. I think the Baha'i writings have
a great deal to say about these issues as well. To fully flesh out the
implications of the writings on economic matters a natural starting point
is comparison and contrast with existing methodologies (New Keysian,
Neo-Classical, Neo-Marxist etc.). The writings do not spell out the new
economic world order in any great detail, however they give principles
which can help us, with the aid of accummulated "secular" knowledge,
flesh out what such an order/regime might be like. Thus there is room for
synthesis, expansion, collaboration, and discarding when it comes to the
interaction between the Faith and the Rest of the World.
Finally, I share you horror at the state of the world we live in. I also
share your frustration with the response of the Baha'i community to these
problems. Teaching and more generally becoming active and productive
members of our wider (not just Baha'i) communities seems in complete
accordance with our Teachings.
My concern about the "cliched" nature of your statement about Americans,
and the American Baha'i Community stems from a horror towards
sterotyping, and a greater frustration with the problems of sterotyping I
have encountered during my time in England (as an American). And with my
belief that it is not entirely accurate - Americans, many atleast (some
American Baha'is even), actually do productive things. However, I think
from your response I better understand the intent and meaning of your
statement.
Thanks for your comments.
Bryan Graham
Pembroke College, Oxford University
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlTue Mar 26 18:18:35 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:42:04 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: hair
Tony,
I think the passage you are thinking of might be The seventh
Glad-Tidings:
The choice of clothing and the cut of the beard and its
dressing are left to the discretion of men. But beware, O
people, lest ye make yourselves the playthings of the
ignorant. (Tablets of Baha'u'llah, page 23)
If this is the one, there's nothing here to alter the Aqdas
law regarding the cut of the hair.
Sen
From jwalbrid@indiana.eduTue Mar 26 18:20:00 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 17:46:10 -0500 (EST)
From: jwalbrid
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Cultural borrowing and religion
Jim Harrison wrote as follows:

> When we look back at the history of religion one of the first things we
see,
> esp. as Baha'is, the major blunders each of the previous religions made
when
> they bowed to the pressure of the cultural norms.

This is a Baha'i commonplace, but I do not think it is true. Three examples:

1) Christianity's acceptance of Greek culture and the spread of
Christianity: In its first years Christianity faced the question of
whether it would remain true to its original cultural norms--i.e., remain
a reform movement within Judaism--or redefine itself within the cominant
Hellenic culture of the Roman Empire. The Christians, by and large,
decided on the latter, a decision associated with the name of Paul. It
seems highly unlikely to me that Christianity would have spread, or
indeed survived, without this transformation into a Hellenistic religion.

2) Islam's development: Early Islam had virtually *no* cultural
resources. Its basic legal ideas, theological concepts, artistic
techniques, philosophical and scientific ideas, political and
administrative methods, etc., were virtually all borrowed from the
Jewish, Christian, and Zoroastrian population of the newly conquered
empire. Islam would have gone nowhere without this mass of borrowed
cultural material. Does anybody seriously think that the desert Arabs
would have reinvented Persian administrative techniques, Greek astronomy,
etc., etc.? that Islam would have been better off without any of this
material?

3) Christianity's acceptance of Greek culture and the rise of modern
science: I have a friend here, one of the leading specialists in the
history of medieval science, who argues that the Christian borrowing of
Greek philosophical thought was a crucial factor in the rise of modern
science. His argument is that Christians in their first four centuries
got used to expressing their religion in terms of Greek philosophy, a
strategy opposed bitterly by many early Christians. When they were
later exposed to Graeco-Islamic thought, they were used to the notion of
borrowing from non-Christians and eagerly translated whatever they could
get their hands on and studied it avidly. This Graeco-Arabic scientific
material was, in turn, a crucial factor in the rise of modern science.

If Christianity, ancient or medieval, or Islam had managed to studiously
avoid borrowing from foreign cultures, they would have remained rigid
cultural backwaters.

john walbridge
From M@upanet.uleth.caTue Mar 26 18:20:14 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:02:42 -0700
From: M
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Qur'an 4:34--other translations
Jonah . . .
I don't mean to be like a dog with a bone here but it's interesting that in
these three translations, as well as in the Dawood translation I cited
earlier, it is "suspicion", or "fear" of "disloyalty", "ill-conduct",
"rebellion", "desertion" and the like which justifies the punishment -
beating.
YUSUFALI: As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and
ill-conduct, etc.
PICKTHAL: . As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and
banish them to beds apart, and scourge them.
SHAKIR: (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and
leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them;
I have also looked at the George Sales and Rodwell translations and
the wording is similar. One may go to elaborate lengths to "soften" this
verse, but I don't see any major difference in the message it conveys. If
a man "fears" or "suspects" disloyalty, disobedience, rebellion, (all rather
nebulous terms) or desertion on the part of his wife he is justified in
beating her. In light of the fact that most violence against women these
days results from such "fears" or "suspicions" on the part of insecure men,
I would say it is extremely dangerous to suggest that this absurd verse is
part of the "revealed word of God".

***************************************************************
Violence springs from seven root causes; wealth without work, pleasure
without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality,
science without humanity, worship without sacrifice and politics without
principles.
(
attributed to) Mohandas Gandhi
****************************************************************
From M@upanet.uleth.caTue Mar 26 18:21:03 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:03:02 -0700
From: M
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: beating women...
Quanta wrote, among other things,
. . . Get a life and give me a break. Why are you picking on moslems only,
>if you are truly concerned with the plight of women in general?
>I can guarantee you that there are Baha'i men who are also oppressor.
>What are your "deeds", not knowledge of "words" in educating men
>and healing the wounds caused by the violence committed
>against the millions of women in the world?? That'll help!!
>
I am not "picking on" anyone!!! I was simply prompted to piggyback on
Phil's post in which he had asked for some explanation of a verse from the
Quran. I added a request for some explanation of the verse pertaining to
the "beating of 'disobedient' women" as it is one that I myself have been
clobbered over the head with by a very dear friend of mine who is militantly
anti-Christian, anti-Islam or anti anything pertaining to institutionalized
religion, who is unflinching in her view that religion is nothing more than
an excuse to oppress and abuse women, and who is impenetrably articulate and
super rational. This friend was raised in an upper middle class,
allegedly Christian family, and endured 15 years of abuse from a highly
respect, "church going, God fearing" S.O.B. so I do not dispute or belittle
her views, nor would I attempt to defend that hideous verse from the Koran.
I agree with you 100% that this is an "indefensible teaching". I don't give
a sweet damn about the time, place or cultural context; if this translation
is even close to accurate this verse is not "of God".
I merely posed a question, Quanta, I did not express any views on
this issue.
I dared not express my views on this issue on this forum. I am painfully
aware of the disproportionate amount of violence against women and children
within the Baha'i community, the agonizingly slow progress being made in
casting off he burden of several thousand years of misogynist tradition.
I posted the previous item hoping that I might get some comments on,
explanation of, or response to the item itself - instead, I'm told to "get a
life", accused of picking on "moslems only", of being ignorant of or
insincere about the issue, of being more concerned with "words" than
"deeds", having questionable motives etc.
***************************************************************
Violence springs from seven root causes; wealth without work, pleasure
without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality,
science without humanity, worship without sacrifice and politics without
principles.
(
attributed to) Mohandas Gandhi
****************************************************************
From M@upanet.uleth.caTue Mar 26 18:22:05 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:02:15 -0700
From: M
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Lawh-i-maqsud
Dear Friends:
I appreciated the comments from John Walbridge (concerning
"references to the learned in the Lawh-i Maqsud") and from Sen McGlinn and
others (re. "such exhortations to union and concord as are inscribed in the
Books of the prophets . . . etc.)
I can see now why J.W. cautions against "depending on English
translations for word level interpretations". "The high endeavors of their
rulers" as opposed to the more literal rendering " the spiritual power of
the mystical saints", shifts the emphasis from the spiritual, creative, or
mystical to the administrative and organizational aspects of the Faith and
influences the development of the "personality" of the community - (Perhaps
if Derek Cockshut had been the translator it would have read "the high
endeavors of their economists." ;-) At any rate, John, is this simply a
matter of "loose" or "wrong" translation or is there an explanation for this
shift in emphasis?

Could we now begin a slow walk through this Tablet. I'm not
going to attempt to elaborate on anything but I do want to throw in some
questions here and there.
LAWH-I-MAQSUD
He is God, exalted is He, the Lord of Majesty and Power
A praise which is exalted above every mention or description beseemeth the
Adored One, the Possessor of all things visible and invisible, Who hath
enabled the Primal Point to reveal countless Books and epistles and Who,
through the potency of His sublime Word, hath called into being the entire
creation, whether of the former or more recent generations.
1. "the Adored One" is "exalted above" all mention and praise but how can
"a praise" be exalted above every mention? This seems like strange wording
to me.
2. Does the "Primal Point" here refer to the Bab specifically, or to all the
manifestations of the past? The books and epistles of the Bab are not
"countless" but perhaps the books and epistles of all the manifestations
collectively are.
3. "Hath called into being the entire creation, whether of the former or
more recent generations" This wording seems very ambiguous to me and
confuses me. Doesn't the "entire creation" encompass all generations?
Moreover He hath in every age and cycle, in conformity with His
transcendent wisdom, sent forth a divine Messenger to revive the dispirited
and despondent souls with the living waters of His Utterance, One Who is
indeed the Expounder, the true Interpreter, inasmuch as man is unable to
comprehend that which hath streamed forth from the Pen of Glory and is
recorded in His Heavenly Books.
Men at all times and under all conditions stand in need of one to exhort
them, guide them and to instruct and teach them. Therefore He hath sent
forth His Messengers, His Prophets and chosen ones that they might acquaint
the people with the divine purpose underlying the revelation of Books and
the raising up of Messengers, and that everyone may become aware of the
trust of God which is latent in the reality of every soul.
1. "Messengers", "Prophets" and "chosen ones" are there 3 categories of
teachers being refered to here?
2. "Messengers" and Prophets are capitalized but not "chosen ones". Does
"chosen ones" refer to those who recognize the "Messengers"
From belove@sover.netTue Mar 26 18:24:47 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 18:48:32 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: The UnChristian Koran
Talking with a friend of mine about the World's Religions and why I am a Baha'i despite the mishagosh (Burl will translate) and I mentioned that Judaism and Christianity seemed, to me, when I was younger, to insist that I accept God and God's Messenger as manifested in "My Religion," but also deny the Messenger as manifested in "Their Religion." I said that Islam taught to accept them all. He opens my Koran to "The Table" verses 55 + and points out the following:
"Oh believers, take not Jews and Christians
as friends; they are friends of each other.
Whoso of you makes them his friends
is one of them. God guides not the people of the evildoers."
Well! I don't mind saying that I found this a very unChristian sentiment. If you know what I mean.
Can anyone explain this lack of Charity in the Koran?
Philip
From iskandar@ns.moran.comTue Mar 26 18:48:27 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:14:11 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: Auschwitz
As I said, could God have prevented the Martyrdom of the Bab or the crucifixion of Christ?
Could God create a piece of stone big enough that even He could not pick up?
Bye,
Iskandar
----------
From: Wilgar123@aol.com[SMTP:Wilgar123@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 1996 9:50 AM
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Auschwitz
A seeker asked: "From a Baha'i point of view could God have prevented
Auschwitz?" Comments
Bill G
From iskandar@ns.moran.comTue Mar 26 18:48:40 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:20:52 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: 'jwalbrid'
Cc: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: Translation of tablet on Baha'u'llah's childhood
Thank you so very much for your lucid translation, John.
I was reading Baha'u'lla's Book of Covenant in which expressions like "naboodih wa nIstand" or its affirmative variants occur three times.
The important point which struck me was the fact that Baha'u'llah referred to Himself as "child" i.e., in 1820's or early 1830's.
Regards,
Iskandar
----------
From: jwalbrid[SMTP:jwalbrid@indiana.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 1996 6:08 AM
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Translation of tablet on Baha'u'llah's childhood
Howa'l-mahboob!
He is the well-beloved!
inshA'allAh dar sAyeh-i-rahmat-i- rahmAnI wa qibAb-i-inAyat-i-sobhAnI
sAkin wa mostarIh bAshId.
Bar hasab-i-zAhir, man kuchekam, khatt nadAram; wa lAkin chun In
ommy bi-sidrih-i-ilAhI motamassek ast, bI ilm mIkhAnad wa bI khatt
mInevisad; wa In dar Alam-i-bAtin nazd-i-ahl-i-basar mash-hood ast.
aghyAr az In sirr AgAh naboodih wa nIstand.
He is the well beloved.
God willing, you are residing and at rest beneath the shadow the mercy of
the All-Merciful and within the pavillion of the exalted providence.
Outwardly I am a child and cannot not write, yet since this illiterate one
clings to the divine tree without knowledge I read and without knowing
how I write. This is apparent in the hidden world to the people of
insight. Others were and are unaware of this mystery.
As to the date of this tablet, I would want to see the manuscript and
know something about where it comes from. The "naboodih wa nIstand" is a
characteristically Babi grammatical form, which would seem to date it
in the Babi period. Ahang, do you know about this text?
john walbridge
From rstockman@usbnc.orgWed Mar 27 00:20:22 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 18:22:23
From: "Stockman, Robert"
To: Talisman@indiana.edu, jwalbrid
Subject: Re: Cultural borrowing and religion
This is a fascinating posting and highlights the difficulties any
religion faces as it grows, for it must transform and borrow, yet it
also must remain faithful to itself. Paul is indeed associated with
the Hellenization of Christianity, a transformation essential to
Christianity's success, if not its survival. Yet there remains within
Christianity many--some highly cultured--critics of Paul. Some modern
Christians have denounced him as a traitor who betrayed Christianity.

The debate about Paul will probably go on as long as Christianity
exists (and maybe longer). An even more telling argument, perhaps,
can be made about Shi'ism's borrowings from Greek philosophy--
Neoplatonism--and other non-Islamic mystical and religious sources.
Some of these elements were denounced as ghuluww, extremist. Some are
particularly prominent in Shaykhism, as I understand it, and surprise
surprise! Some were endorsed by the Bab and Baha'u'llah by including
them in Their writings. So some cultural borrowing has ultimately
been endorsed by Manifestations, a thousand years after the borrowing
occurred.

The question, therefore, is not whether borrowing will occur, but what
and how. I doubt we will agonize over whether the writings have
anything to say about the color of stoplights in the Most Great Peace
(could using green as "go" be inappropriate because it is the color of
siyyids?). But perhaps we should agonize over the use of Freudian
analysis to understand the Manifestation of God's personality. And
sometimes we will have to be a bit tolerant; who knows what "ghuluww"
interpretation of Baha'u'llah's revelation will be useful to the next
Manifestation.

-- Rob Stockman

P.S. to Tony Lee: How's this entry?

P.P.S. Further agonizing over green lights. When my father in law
stops at a red light and he gets impatient with it, he sometimes will
say "siyyidish bukun" (make it a siyyid, i.e., make it green).
Perhaps the color green is a spiritually unhealthy choice for traffic
signals after all.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Cultural borrowing and religion
Author: jwalbrid at INTERNET
Date: 3/26/96 5:51 PM
Jim Harrison wrote as follows:

> When we look back at the history of religion one of the first things we
see,
> esp. as Baha'is, the major blunders each of the previous religions made
when
> they bowed to the pressure of the cultural norms.

This is a Baha'i commonplace, but I do not think it is true. Three examples:

1) Christianity's acceptance of Greek culture and the spread of
Christianity: In its first years Christianity faced the question of
whether it would remain true to its original cultural norms--i.e., remain
a reform movement within Judaism--or redefine itself within the cominant
Hellenic culture of the Roman Empire. The Christians, by and large,
decided on the latter, a decision associated with the name of Paul. It
seems highly unlikely to me that Christianity would have spread, or
indeed survived, without this transformation into a Hellenistic religion.

2) Islam's development: Early Islam had virtually *no* cultural resources.
Its basic legal ideas, theological concepts, artistic techniques,
philosophical and scientific ideas, political and administrative methods,
etc., were virtually all borrowed from the Jewish, Christian, and
Zoroastrian population of the newly conquered empire. Islam would have
gone nowhere without this mass of borrowed cultural material. Does
anybody seriously think that the desert Arabs would have reinvented
Persian administrative techniques, Greek astronomy, etc., etc.? that
Islam would have been better off without any of this material?

3) Christianity's acceptance of Greek culture and the rise of modern
science: I have a friend here, one of the leading specialists in the
history of medieval science, who argues that the Christian borrowing of
Greek philosophical thought was a crucial factor in the rise of modern
science. His argument is that Christians in their first four centuries
got used to expressing their religion in terms of Greek philosophy, a
strategy opposed bitterly by many early Christians. When they were
later exposed to Graeco-Islamic thought, they were used to the notion of
borrowing from non-Christians and eagerly translated whatever they could
get their hands on and studied it avidly. This Graeco-Arabic scientific
material was, in turn, a crucial factor in the rise of modern science.

If Christianity, ancient or medieval, or Islam had managed to studiously
avoid borrowing from foreign cultures, they would have remained rigid
cultural backwaters.

john walbridge

From nineteen@onramp.netWed Mar 27 00:21:34 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 19:41:55 -0500
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Talisman as a therapy group
Dear Don,
If you have been reading my posts over a period of time you probably
realize that I am not encouraging anyone to bad behavior, egotism or
anything of that sort.
On the other hand I don't think it makes any sense to for me to tell
other people what they are doing on this list is wrong--that is not to
say I agree with all of the things expressed here. Linda has made a big
deal about agreeing with me on this previous post, thus you can see how
far some of the friends feel alienated from the general body of
believers. For me it is not a matter of agreement but of healthy
exchange. Beyond this, positive and loving expression towards those who
feel hurt and rejected rightly or wrongly by their fellow believers is
from my POV essential to healing the rif.
There seemed to be alot of positive agreement that our Gay and lesbian
brothers needed our love and encouragement not alot of easily expressed
piety. I simply wonder when will the friends love each other and stop
trying to prove who understands the Faith best. As far as I'm concerned
it is the one who has embodied the teachings of Baha'u'llah in their
lives.
Talsiman is the people who belong to it. They are scholars and teachers
and buisness people, students ect. From my POV it doesn't have to be
anything other than people communicating and growing. For some it is
therapy or spiritual advancement--it can also be a discussion of many
other things.
I don't believe it matters whether it is group theapy or consultation
because a list is NOT an administrative body. I don't believe anyone is
confusing the two. It seems to me what you were saying was very good
for assemblies and so on to consider if need be, but I don't see its
application to this list.
Mark Foster, who I admire, has started his list which is far more gentle
in its approach to discourse. The difference with Talsiman, from what I
can see, is that many members of it consider themselves outside the
Baha'i mainstream or worse. I want to share the concerns of my Baha'i
brothers and sisters who have those feelings of alienation and distrust.
I want to reasure, not criticize them. Its not up to me to do that.
Richard
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduWed Mar 27 00:22:07 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:10:18 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Take it easy guys ;-)
Dear Gordy,
There is something about me I have to reveal. In many occasions,
I have no clue "who" said it. I only remember of it being said.
Thus, you can say that I am detached from the persons and very
attached to the issues. So, when I respond in certain ways, from my
POV I am responding to the thoughts and not to persons. In your case,
I didn't even realize that it was you who posted the Quranic
verses. I have to say that I have a very allergic reaction to this
subject for my poor, sweet darling mother was in bloody mess 5 a.m.
one day. At the age of 8 I had to sneak out of the house and get
neighbours to rescue her from my dad. He always recited that which
you quote. Now, consider this stupid, personal or whatever. I am
sharing it with you, in order to help you understand. Maybe you
will be less upset with me now. I sure hope so. The world is full of
this kind of pain. There is not much room left for burrying it!!
Does that make a sense to you dear? Just as you said, we are
talking about issues and not individuals. You do it. I do it. We all
do it, misunderstand each other that is. It's hard to understand when
we are deprived of the facial expressions of the person. Most of the
time, I am laughing while writing. At others I have tears in the eyes.
So, now let us play this game. Each time an individual raises an
issue, or creates one by raising one, let us examine the spiritual
principles involved in the issues, the reactions and etc. etc.
I got a real nice poem from you and the Loyal Lion asking me
to make a nice finjan of turkish coffee and some baklava and
perhaps turn on some turkish folklore and teach you guys some line-
dancing. Hey!! I am all for it. See, I am not that hard to get along
with. There is time for debate, play, learn and yes! fighting too!!
You are my brothers! Even if you don't like my style of talking.
As far as talisman and the quote from Bernard Shaw, (who was it?)
the Prophets are the best examples how there are times you fight to
change the system, others you learn to live in it. I think we got
to do the both. Although, presently I am reading only selected
messages, I LOVE TALISMAN! All I can say is this, I've been to other
churches, I feel home at this one. Everyone has a place, every place
is a home for someone.
I believe there is something in the Quran about God creating some
as a test for others. So, are you passing your tests!! I got my
diploma with honors ;-) in living as a test to others.
love,
q.
**************************************************************************
A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole
planet, freed from national hinderances and restrictions, and functioning
with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity.-Shoghi Effendi, 1936
From derekmc@ix.netcom.comWed Mar 27 00:22:33 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:09:10 -0800
From: DEREK COCKSHUT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Beating of women
Dear Talismanians
I believe the Baha'i position on the beating of women is
quite clear, it unacceptable and not allowed.The House of
Justice in their letter of January 1993 made this and other
similar matters very clear.The Letter related to Violence and
Sexual Abuse of Women and Children. Abuse the House stated is
a definite possible condition for divorce, just as rape is a
possible condition for an abortion.A man committing incest,
rape or abuse in addition to having his administrative status
subject to sanctions can have the rights of parenthood
removed. The Surah of women in the Quran has nothing to do
with the Faith, as Baha'is it is what is in the writings of
this Faith relating to social conditions of today and the
future we should concern ourselves.
Kindest Regards
Derek Cockshut
From abtavangar@geoenv.comWed Mar 27 00:23:16 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:36:28 -0500
From: Alex Tavangar
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Qur'an 4:34--other translations
> I have also looked at the George Sales and Rodwell translations and
>the wording is similar. One may go to elaborate lengths to "soften" this
>verse, but I don't see any major difference in the message it conveys. If
>a man "fears" or "suspects" disloyalty, disobedience, rebellion, (all rather
>nebulous terms) or desertion on the part of his wife he is justified in
>beating her. In light of the fact that most violence against women these
>days results from such "fears" or "suspicions" on the part of insecure men,
>I would say it is extremely dangerous to suggest that this absurd verse is
>part of the "revealed word of God".
>
> A. M
Dear ,
There are other verses in the Qur'an that seem to condone slavery and other
acts of violence. Rather than denying the authenticity of the Qur'an, I
would point to the extent to which humanity has changed and matured in 1400
years. God and His Will have not changed but we have. So today we are able
to receive a greater measure of the Divine Will or enlightenment. There are
numerous quotes by Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha about this that I'm sure you
are aware of and I don't need to cite here.
We must keep in mind that by virtue of its conditionality vis-a-vis
humanity's capacity, the "revealed word of God" is not exempt from
obsolescence.
Historical perspective would also be very helpful. Here Juan and John can
shed much light on the historical context for the verses in the Qur'an about
status of women.
Warmest Regards,
Alex B. Tavangar
From M@upanet.uleth.caWed Mar 27 00:24:00 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 20:55:01 -0700
From: M
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Quran 4:34
Re. Quran 4:34, Jonah wrote . . .
>One little interpretation, one commonly given by apologetes but
>perhaps not historically accurate, is that the meaning is that you can
>beat them, not just with a stick the thickness of the thumb, but with one
>the size of the thumb. Since this would be not a beating at all, but a
>farce, the point is that, if you beat women, you make a fool of yourself.
>But like I say, that's just an apologetic interpretation.
>
Isn't this stretching it a bit? Where is the "rule of thumb" alluded to in
the Koran? I thought that was a later European legalistic brainwave. Is it
Islamic in origin?
It seems to me that the verse in question says what it says and no
alternative translations, elastic interpretations, or intellectual
gymnastics can alter it's meaning significantly.
**************************
The Universe may be
as great as they say
but it wouldn't be missed
if it didn't exist (Piet Hein)
**************************
From Wilgar123@aol.comWed Mar 27 00:30:16 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 23:21:14 -0500
From: Wilgar123@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Auschwitz
Dear Friends,
I believe that the Auschwitz question points out some of the problems
related to popular theistic interpretations of divinity with their heavy
doses of anthropomorphism. Inevitably there is an identification of the
notion of "All Powerful" with human notions of control. God must have been
able to prevent Auschwitz, the argument runs, because He is "All Powerful,"
and the corollary to this way of thinking is the free will argument; this is
how He separates the gold from the tin, bronze etc. I personally find this
position somewhat hard to understand, as there would be easier and less
painful ways for an "All-Powerful" Being to accomplish the same task. Also,
the argument fails to come to terms with natural disasters (and the immense
suffering they cause). Perhaps we can learn something from our Theravadin
Buddhist brothers who do not feel the need to project human notions of power
and control upon Reality or even some of our Christian brothers like Berdyaev
who believed that God was not a power "outside" and "above." Baha'u'llah
constantly reminds us that our conceptions of Divinity are limited or
conditioned by our own natures, yet in the name of glorifying God, we
continue to attribute to Divinity essentially human characteristics. As for
my reply to the Auschwitz question, I would say that microcosmically God
cannot "prevent" anything just as a Mother's love cannot prevent her child
from experiencing the pain of separation which is individuation. Life is
suffering. At times, both individually and historically, this fact becomes
more readily apparent. Profound faith, I believe, is born of accepting this
fact without resentment and ultimately trusting in the creative powers of
love, compassion, and justice.
Bill G
From Member1700@aol.comWed Mar 27 00:31:21 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 23:31:06 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Auschwitz
Well, my answer is no.
No, God cannot make a stone that is so big that he cannot pick it
up--without immediately ceasing to be God.
Neither can God become a man without abandoning the godhead, because that
is the way the universe has been set up.
Neither could God have intervened to prevent Auschwitz, since he has set
up the universe to allow human beings free will. Nor would he prevent worse.
To intervene would be to change the nature of the universe, and the nature
of the godhead.
But, the real question here is the problem of evil. That is a serious
philosophical problem that I am afraid that we cannot solve on Talisman. It
has vexed the human race for centuries.
The facile answer that yes, God could have prevented Auschwitz but
couldn't be bothered won't work, I am afraid. After all, if YOU could have
prevented Auschwitz, would YOU have prevented it. Anyone who doesn't
immediately answer yes would be judged a moral monster. Are we to assume
that God has such a monsterously underdeveloped sense of compassion and
morality?
Tony
From nineteen@onramp.netWed Mar 27 00:31:31 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 22:54:35 -0500
From: "Richard C. Logan"
To: Talisman
Subject: Healing Prayer
Dear Members,
It says in a quote from a letter from the Guardian introducing the
"Tablet of Ahmad" that the "Healing Prayer...have been invested by
Baha'u'llah with a special potency and significance"
Can anyone tell me exactly which healing prayer is being refered to?
Richard
Richard C. Logan nineteen@onramp.net
Maintain HomePage "The Baha'is of Lubbock"
http://rampages.onramp.net/~nineteen/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How manifold are the truths which must remain unuttered until the
appointed time is come! Even as it has been said:
"Not everything that a man knoweth can be disclosed, nor can
everything that he can disclose be regarded as timely, nor can every
timely utterance be considered as suited to the capacity of those who
hear it." --Gleanings from the writings of Baha'u'llah
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From DaveTayl@cris.comWed Mar 27 00:33:35 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 00:19:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Dave Taylor
To: Jonah Winters , talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Sources for Martyrdom
At 02:07 AM 3/23/96 -0500, you wrote:
> Greetings. No, I'm not seeking how-to advice! I'm getting ready to
>start my master's thesis, and seek research suggestions.
> I propose to examine the theme of martyrdom through the Shi'i,
>Babi, and Baha'i religions and trace the continuities and
>discontinuities. Most of the Shi'i sources I can find from library
>catalogues, but I need suggestions on the Babi-Baha'i stuff. I think that
>much, or most, of my material will be from unpublished dissertations. (My
>comprehension of Arabic and Persian will still be minimal by that time.)
>Before I order any dissertation that sounds interesting, such as
>Amanat's, Lawson's, Rafati's, or MacEoin's two, does anyone have any
>pointers?
>
Jonah, on a related subject, "The Suffering Self--Pain and Narrative
Representation in the Early Christian Era" by Judith Perkins, a classicist
at St Joseph's College down here in West Hartford, concerns the idea of
martyrdom as it was developed in late antiquity and became an important
vehicle for the development of Christianity which shaped its character and
developed its constituency. Routledge,published in London and New York,1995.
dave taylor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
It rained so hard the night I left
The weather it was dry
And it was so hot I froze to death
Susannah, don't you cry
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From A.Aniss@unsw.EDU.AUWed Mar 27 00:34:37 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:30:33 +1000
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Kitab-ahd
Dear Talismanians,
Here is a e-mail that I have sent to World Center in regard
to the name of the Tablet of Baha'u'llah called Kitab-i-Ahd.
With regards,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
[attachment]
Dear Beloved friends,
I am writing to you in regard to the translation of the name of
one of the tablets of Baha'u'llah. In a recent publication from
the World Center named "Tablets of Baha`u`llah", the tablet of
Kitabu`l-Ahdi has been mentioned as Kitab-i-Ahd and translated
as The Book of Covanent. However, when one researches on this
topic within the available writings of Our Beloved Guardian we
find that he uses The name of Kitabu`l-Ahdi and mentions it as
"The Book of My Covanent" and "The Crimson Book", a few of such
refernces are provided below:
"Unlike the Prophets
gone before Him, Whose Covenants were shrouded in mystery, unlike
Baha'u'llah, Whose clearly defined Covenant was incorporated in a
specially written Testament, and designated by Him as "the Book
of My Covenant," the Bab chose to intersperse His Book of Laws,
the Persian Bayan, with unnumbered passages, some designedly
obscure, mostly indubitably clear and conclusive, in which He fixes
the date of the promised Revelation, extols its virtues, asserts its
pre-eminent character, assigns to it unlimited powers and prerogatives,
and tears down every barrier that might be an obstacle to its
recognition."
God Passes By, page 28 (U.S., Second Printing 1979)
"That instrument Baha'u'llah had
expressly provided through the institution of the Covenant, an
institution which He had firmly established prior to His ascension.
This same Covenant He had anticipated in His Kitab-i-Aqdas,
had alluded to it as He bade His last farewell to the members
of His family, who had been summoned to His bed-side, in the
days immediately preceding His ascension, and had incorporated it
in a special document which He designated as "the Book of My
Covenant," and which He entrusted, during His last illness, to His
eldest son Abdu'l-Baha.
Written entirely in His own hand; unsealed, on the ninth day
after His ascension in the presence of nine witnesses chosen from
amongst His companions and members of His Family; read subsequently,
on the afternoon of that same day, before a large company
assembled in His Most Holy Tomb, including His sons, some of the
Bab's kinsmen, pilgrims and resident believers, this unique and epoch-making
Document, designated by Baha'u'llah as His "Most Great
Tablet," and alluded to by Him as the "Crimson Book" in His
"Epistle to the Son of the Wolf," can find no parallel in the Scriptures
of any previous Dispensation, not excluding that of the Bab Himself.
For nowhere in the books pertaining to any of the world's religious
systems, not even among the writings of the Author of the Babi
Revelation, do we find any single document establishing a Covenant
endowed with an authority comparable to the Covenant which
Baha'u'llah had Himself instituted.
God Passes By, page 238 (U.S., Second Printing 1979)
"To Him He, whilst still in that city, had alluded (in a Tablet addressed
to Haji Muhammad Ibrahim-i-Khalil) as the one amongst His sons
"from Whose tongue God will cause the signs of His power to stream
forth," and as the one Whom "God hath specially chosen for His
Cause." On Him, at a later period, the Author of the Kitab-i-Aqdas,
in a celebrated passage, subsequently elucidated in the "Book of My
Covenant," had bestowed the function of interpreting His Holy
Writ, proclaiming Him, at the same time, to be the One "Whom
God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root."
God Passes By, page 2243 (U.S., Second Printing 1979)
"This crisis, misconceived as a schism, which political as well as
ecclesiastical adversaries, no less than the fast dwindling remnant of
the followers of Mirza Yahya hailed as a signal for the immediate
disruption and final dissolution of the system established by Baha'u'llah,
was precipitated at the very heart and center of His Faith,
and was provoked by no one less than a member of His own family,
a half-brother of Abdu'l-Baha, specifically named in the book of
the Covenant, and holding a rank second to none except Him Who
had been appointed as the Center of that Covenant.
God Passes By, page 246 (U.S., Second Printing 1979)
However, Abdu'l-Baha have refered to it as "The Book of the
Covenant", in the following passage:
"Had the Covenant not come to pass, had it not been revealed
from the Supreme Pen and had not the Book of the Covenant,
like unto the ray of the Sun of Reality, illuminated the world,
the forces of the Cause of God would have been utterly scattered
and certain souls who were the prisoners of their own passions
and lusts would have taken into their hands an axe, cutting the
root of this Blessed Tree. Every person would have pushed
forward his own desire and every individual aired his own
opinion! Notwithstanding this great Covenant, a few negligent
souls galloped with their chargers into the battlefield, thinking
perchance they might be able to weaken the foundation of the
Cause of God:"
Tablets of the Divine Plan, page 51 (U.S., 1993 pocket-size ed.)
On Talisman discussion group, one of the participants has
elaborated on this tablet as follows, which could suggest a mistake
has occured on the part of the translators of this tablet.
"I have to say that in my view (with all due apologies) the World
Centre's revised translation is incorrect. The original of this
Tablet was printed in Adiyah-i Hazrat-i Mahbub which was reviewed
by Abdu'l-Baha before printing, and the title there is "Kitabu
Ahdi". Note "Kitab-i Ahdi" is incorrect, as its Persianized
reading of the Arabic phrase "Kitabu" -- "u" is added to Kitab
because a name follows. "Ahdi" means "My Covenant". The "i" at
the end of Ahd makes it sing. possessive. Therefore, as the
original Text in the hand of Baha'u'llah has never been produced
(there are a bit of rumors associated with it, which is beyond
our discussion), then we must go along with Abdu'l-Baha's
approved title, which has "My" in the title, hence "Kitab-i Ahd"
is incorrect, so is "The Book of Covenant". In other words, if
in the recent publication someone has altered the Guardian's
translation, they have messed up. Pure and simple."
As I find it very important to get the names of tablets right at
these early stages of work on translation of His writings in our
Faith and have no knowledge of why the translation committee at
the World Center have opted for a different name to that used by
The Guardian, I will be very grateful if the House or that
committee can elaborate on this matter more and clarify the
present ambiguous situation. In case this topic has been dealt
with previously, I will be thankfull to receive communications
issued on this matter from the World Center.
With warmest Baha'i Love and greetings,
Ahmad Aniss.
From Member1700@aol.comWed Mar 27 00:48:48 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:25:06 -0500
From: Member1700@aol.com
To: jrcole@umich.edu
Subject: Re: Happy Naw Ruz
Dear Juan:
So sorry to hear about Sheena's medical troubles. She has a lot of
trouble with pregnancies, it seems, and you all might want to avoid future
danger. Just a thought.
Your analysis of insecure intellectuals in alliance with the Baha'i
community is apt indeed. But, so far all they have been able to serve up is
pretty weak broth and the community is beginning to notice. The alliance
cannot deliver change or real community growth. That is its weakness.
Talisman, for having less than 200 Baha'is on it, is attracting a whole
lot of attention in the Baha'i world. That says something good about your
"outreach," doesn't it.
What is your new book?
Tony
From M@upanet.uleth.caWed Mar 27 00:49:07 1996
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 22:50:52 -0700
From: M
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UnChristian Koran
Re. . . .
>"Oh believers, take not Jews and Christians
>as friends; they are friends of each other.
>Whoso of you makes them his friends
>is one of them. God guides not the people of the evildoers."
>
>Well! I don't mind saying that I found this a very unChristian sentiment.
If you know what I mean.
>
>Can anyone explain this lack of Charity in the Koran?
>
>Philip
And while "anyone" is at it, (since Phil raised the issue) could
"anyone" also explain 4:34 of the Koran.
"Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one
superior to the others, and because they spend their wealth to maintain
them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah
has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish
them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take
no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme. " ( translated by
N.J. Dawood - Penguin).
G
***************************************************************
Violence springs from seven root causes; wealth without work, pleasure
without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality,
science without humanity, worship without sacrifice and politics without
principles.
(
attributed to) Mohandas Gandhi
****************************************************************
From secretariat@bwc.orgWed Mar 27 00:57:40 1996
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 09:18:12 -0600
From: Baha'i World Centre
To: Baha'i Studies ,
Talisman
Subject: Message from the House of Justice re: Lay Baha'is, etc.
Beloved ones -
I am redirecting this message to you. It came from the Secretariat of the
Universal House of Justice this morning. - Mark Foster
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 March 1996
Transmitted by email: mfoster@tyrell.net
Dr. Mark Foster
Dear Baha'i Friend,
The Universal House of Justice has asked us to respond on its behalf to
your email letter of 4 January 1996 conveying your concern about certain issues
which have arisen in the discussions on the Talisman network.
You express disquiet that attempts being made to introduce a distinction
between "Baha'i laymen" and "Baha'i scholars" with respect to the study of the
Faith tend to generate a spirit of disunity among the friends. Your concern
is fully justified. Such an approach to the study of the Cause would betray
a fundamental misunderstanding of the pattern of Baha'i society as set out
in the Teachings of the Faith.
As you know, Baha'u'llah says that the pursuit of knowledge has been
enjoined upon everyone, and knowledge itself is described by Him as "wings
to man's life" and "a ladder for his ascent". Those whose high attainments
in this respect make it possible for them to contribute in important ways
to the advancement of civilization are deserving of society's recognition
and gratitude.
In the study of the Revelation of God, an individual's proficiency in
one of the physical or social sciences, in law, philology, or other fields
of specialization will often throw valuable light on issues being examined,
and such contributions are greatly to be appreciated. The field of Near
East studies, mentioned in your letter, is one that can assist in this way.
However, no one specialization among the many branches of scholarly research
can confer upon its practitioners an authoritative role in the common effort
of exploring the implications of so staggering and all-encompassing a body
of truth.
Collateral with His summons to the pursuit of knowledge, Baha'u'llah has
abolished entirely that feature of all past religions by which a special caste
of persons such as the Christian priesthood or the Islamic `ulama came to
exercise authority over the religious understanding and practice of their
fellow believers. In a letter written in Persian on his behalf to the
Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Istanbul, the Guardian is at some pains to
underline the importance of this marked departure from past religious history:
But praise be to God that the Pen of Glory has done away with
the unyielding and dictatorial views of the learned and the wise,
dismissed the assertions of individuals as an authoritative criterion,
Dr. Mark Foster 14 March 1996
Page 2
even though they were recognized as the most accomplished and learned
among men, and ordained that all matters be referred to authorized
centres and specified assemblies.
The Baha'i Dispensation is described in the words of its Founder as "a
day that shall not be followed by night". Through His Covenant, Baha'u'llah
has provided an unfailing source of divine guidance that will endure throughout
the Dispensation. Authority to administer the affairs of the community and to
ensure both the integrity of the Word of God and the promotion of the Faith's
message is conferred upon the Administrative Order to which the Covenant has
given birth. It is solely by the process of free election or by unsought
appointment that the members of the institutions of this Order are assigned
to their positions in it. There is no profession in either the teaching of the
Faith or its administration for which one can train or to which a believer can
properly aspire. Cautionary words of Baha'u'llah are particularly relevant:
Ever since the seeking of preference and distinction came into play,
the world has been laid waste. It has become desolate....
Indeed, man is noble, inasmuch as each one is a repository
of the sign of God. Nevertheless, to regard oneself as superior in
knowledge, learning or virtue, or to exalt oneself or seek preference
is a grievous transgression.
The promotion of learning of every kind among the Faith's members is an
activity fundamental to the achievement of the community's wide-ranging goals.
Consequently, the encouragement of individual believers to acquire knowledge,
the operation of Baha'i schools, universities, and training institutes, the
organization of study groups, and the work of task forces dedicated to relating
the principles of the Revelation to the challenges facing humankind all
represent activities with which both the Counsellors and their auxiliaries, on
the one hand, and National and Local Spiritual Assemblies, on the other, must
concern themselves. In shouldering these demanding responsibilities, Baha'i
institutions everywhere find their efforts greatly enhanced by the assistance
of believers whose intellectual pursuits, qualities of character, and devotion
to the Cause particularly fit them to contribute their services.
A special responsibility in the matter rests on the Counsellors because
of the duty assigned to them to assist in releasing the potential of the
individual believer. The members of this institution, appointed for specific
terms, have been given the task of carrying forward into the future the
functions of the protection and propagation of the Faith conferred in the Will
and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha on the Hands of the Cause. Thus, the Counsellors
are called on to "diffuse the Divine Fragrances, to edify the souls of men, to
promote learning, to improve the character of all men and to be, at all times
and under all conditions, sanctified and detached from earthly things." Like
the Hands, the Counsellors have no interpretive authority, an authority
conferred by the Covenant only on Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian of the Faith.
While some Counsellors, like some of the Hands, will have pursued various
academic or professional disciplines in their individual careers, their
discharge of their duties is not dependent on proficiencies of this kind.
All of them share fully in the vital task of encouraging believers everywhere
Dr. Mark Foster 14 March 1996
Page 3
in the acquisition of knowledge, in all its dimensions. All share, too, in
the responsibility assigned to the institution of which they are members to
protect the Faith against its enemies, both external and internal, a concern
to which both the Master and the Guardian attached pre-eminent importance.
An understanding of the principles by which we explore the Revelation
of Baha'u'llah depends, too, on an appreciation of the broad nature of
the authority conferred on the Universal House of Justice. Speaking of the
relevant responsibilities of its elected membership, the "Will and Testament"
states:
It is incumbent upon these members (of the Universal House of
Justice) to gather in a certain place and deliberate upon all problems
which have caused difference, questions that are obscure and matters
that are not expressly recorded in the Book. Whatsoever they decide
has the same effect as the Text itself.
Emphasizing, in this same Charter of the Administrative Order, the
importance of believers' wholehearted adherence to the guidance given by
both the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice, Abdu'l-Baha says:
Whatsoever they decide is of God. Whoso obeyeth him not, neither
obeyeth them, hath not obeyed God; whoso rebelleth against him and
against them hath rebelled against God; whoso opposeth him hath
opposed God; whoso contendeth with them hath contended with God...."
Your concern for the integrity of the study of the Faith and your desire
to promote it do you much credit. Be sure that the House of Justice will pray
ardently in the Holy Shrines that Baha'u'llah will abundantly bless and confirm
your efforts in this path.
With loving Baha'i greetings,
Department of the Secretariat
cc: International Teaching Centre
Board of Counsellors in the Americas
National Assembly of the United States (by email)
From jjensen@welchlink.welch.jhu.eduWed Mar 27 01:15:34 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 01:06:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Joan Jensen
To: Member1700@aol.com
Cc: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Auschwitz
This thread brings to mind the passage in Gleanings.
"Know thou, O fruit of My Tree, that the decrees of the
Sovereign Ordainer, as related to fate and predestination,
are of two kinds. Both are to be obeyed and accepted.
The one is irrevocable, the other is, as termed by men,
impending. To the former all must unreservedly submit,
inasmuch as it is fixed and settled. God, however, is able
to alter or repeal it. As the harm that must result from
such a change will be greater than if the decree had
remained unaltered, all, therefore, should willingly
acquiesce in what God hath willed and confidently abide by
the same."
We might speculate about the nature of the 'harm that must result from
such a change' might be, but consider how horrible a harm, to have been
greater than the events in the death camps! This is one of the
mysteries that leaves me shaking in awe.
Joan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Joan Jensen
Baltimore, Maryland USA
*******************************************************************
"...love and affinity are the fruits of a gentle disposition,
a pure nature and praiseworthy character..."
Selected Writings of 'Abdu'l-Baha, p. 287
*******************************************************************
From Alethinos@aol.comWed Mar 27 01:16:04 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 01:10:29 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Cultural borrowing and religion
Dear Prof. Walbridge:
Your points are well taken. But in my very brief and no doubt insufficient
examples I didn't mention anything about the adoption/absorbtion of various
elements of the other culture. I stated that there was (seen) a political
need to bow to the desires of the current cultural *norms* such as holidays
that were originally pagan etc. Or going along with what is considered the
obvious *truth* of a thing even when it flies in the face of the direct
utterence of the Manifestation. There is a huge difference between this and
adopting what is obviously solid positive elements that have stood the test
of time, i.e. philsophy, science, law, etc. I am sorry that I didn't make
this more clear earlier.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From Alethinos@aol.comWed Mar 27 10:57:17 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 01:43:16 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
Thanks for the insights. Again, it isn't that this issue is not important to
a great many people. As I have gotten older I have discovered a few things. A
smart genreral is one who picks his fights or the time thereof. In other
words while the issue holds a lot for a good number of folk it is, at this
time, pointless to go round and round about it. The House has made its
decision.
And the critical reason I say this dear friend is this: the mental state of
(at least) American society is becoming more fragmented, more out-of-balance.
People are having greater and greater difficulty defining bounderies of what
is acceptable behavior, what is right and wrong, when it is time to just back
off. The Baha'is are by no means immune to this mental test/disease. We have
recieved the answer but we don't like it so we just keep pushing. The UHJ
just doesn't understand; they don't have all the facts, if they could only
see it from the *woman's* point-of-view, etc, etc, etc. We live in a society
that doesn't understand discipline and patience and looking at the "end in
the beginning"; we have got to have it NOW!
This is how factions start. When someone just can't let it go - even for a
time. I was serious when I asked the list what great earth-shaking things
will happen the day after the House said *yes* to women?! Really? Is that
going to change the life of the hooker on the corner? Is that going to help
the abused young teen seek help? No. It is a political posturing issue. You
are from the States, you know our politics: it is all illusion - all sound
bits. And that is what we have come to expect and call for in the Faith here
in America. We want it to look good, i.e. be acceptable to all our friends.
The scholarly minds of Talisman would do a lot more good if they turned their
attention to tearing away the veils of illusion that our beloved community is
spiritually and mentally straighjacketed by. To attack, in full force the
spiritual diseases that the Guardian wrote of concerning this country would
require, on all our parts far, far more courage than stumbling along, as we
have done so well these past thirty odd years behind the usually already
well-worn poltiical (or politically correct) in-roads forged by others with
real grit.
The question is this: what does the world need right now, right this moment
and for the foreseeable near-future from us? What will turn the growing tide
of delusion and dispair in this country around before it ignites into a fire
that no one will be able to control? We have been told in the Writings to be
urgently concerned with the needs of the times in which we live. That require
clear insight - wisdom born not from the front pages of the newspapers but
from seeing to the heart of the spiritual reality at that moment. This is
what we need to do, personally and collectively. There are a myriad tasks
that need doing, yes; but they all lead toward one horizon. There are a
myriad talents that can, through will and God's grace help to achieve these
great things, if they are all truly propelled by a singular vision.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From Geocitizen@aol.comWed Mar 27 10:58:00 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 02:08:37 -0500
From: Geocitizen@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: re: UHJ, stilled voices, words
Let's try this again, shall we?
Several things I did not say have been read into my last post, so here,
again, is what I really said.
The supposition that I want silence on issues such as women's ineligibility
for/exemption from UHJ membership is entirely wrong. I would love nothing
more than to see discussion of such difficult questions yield useful
insights. Yet the fact remains that precious little of that desirable
outcome has occurred; the energy we have invested in such issues has been
mostly dissipated in fruitless contention.
Certain topics clearly drag Talisman discussions into self-defeating
patterns. This does not mean we must be silent on these topics; it does mean
we must recognize this tendency and adjust for it if we want such discussions
to bear fruit. The way we have handled these topics in the past on Talisman
has generated far more heat than light. If we are going to keep discussing
them it would seem wise to find a more illuminating way to go about it. This
should not be read as in any way devaluing whatever benefits some may have
derived from the clashes. The point is to always do better, not to ignore
the good of what has gone before.
All of this may also mean that other topics will be far more fruitful, and
suggesting this possibility is not the same thing as calling for silence and
repression.
It is wishful thinking to believe that Talisman's participants have time to
deeply and repeatedly explore every topic that has some value in it. Our
time is limited and the condition of humanity is dire. We might consider it
wise to focus more of our time on topics that will yield greater fruit. If
some sticky topics seem necessary to touch upon for therapeutic or other
reasons, perhaps we can make an effort to touch upon them only briefly, and
then move on to more productive discussions, rather than devoting thousands
upon thousands of words to them.
Regards,
Kevin
From iskandar@ns.moran.comWed Mar 27 11:01:46 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 06:23:18 -0500
From: "Iskandar Hai, M.D."
To: "'talisman@indiana.edu'"
Subject: RE: beating women...
I believe the Baha'I view is that the Quran is/was the authentically recorded revealed Word of God.
I agree with Alex Tavangar's post about the Word of God not being immune from obsolescence but I do not agree with the term "hideous" attributed to a verse of Quran.
Respectfully,
Iskandar
on Talisman on March 26th:
I am not "picking on" anyone!!! I was simply prompted to piggyback on
Phil's post in which he had asked for some explanation of a verse from the
Quran. I added a request for some explanation of the verse pertaining to
the "beating of 'disobedient' women" as it is one that I myself have been
clobbered over the head with by a very dear friend of mine who is militantly
anti-Christian, anti-Islam or anti anything pertaining to institutionalized
religion, who is unflinching in her view that religion is nothing more than
an excuse to oppress and abuse women, and who is impenetrably articulate and
super rational. This friend was raised in an upper middle class,
allegedly Christian family, and endured 15 years of abuse from a highly
respect, "church going, God fearing" S.O.B. so I do not dispute or belittle
her views, nor would I attempt to defend that hideous verse from the Koran.
I agree with you 100% that this is an "indefensible teaching". I don't give
a sweet damn about the time, place or cultural context; if this translation
is even close to accurate this verse is not "of God".
From Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nlWed Mar 27 11:03:09 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 12:29:31 +0100 (MET)
From: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Tablets list
Dear friends,
A couple of days ago I sent an updated copy of the list of
Baha'u'llah's tablets to Ahmad Aniss (version of March 23, sent
to him on March 25 I think). This began with a list which
Ahmad himself posted on Talisman, to which Ahang has added
the published sources where tablets can be found in the original
languages, and I have been adding the places where English
translations can be found, and we've both been adding new
entries. The version I sent to Ahmad was NOT intended for
Talisman, it is a working version full of my little notes to myself
and questions to Ahang (marked < ) and there are a number of
entries which are provisional while I was waiting to answers
from Juan and Moojen and others on specific tablets. Also the
acknowledgements to those who have helped are not done. So I
was not greatly pleased to see that Ahmad has posted it on
Talisman in that state, particularly as more than half the work is
from Ahang and I have not received his permission to publish it
in any form: I made a proposal to him a couple of days ago and
await his reply. So I suppose Ahang will be highly annoyed to
see his work posted prematurely and without permission, and he
has every reason to blame me, since I should have put an
embargo on the list when I sent it to Ahmad, which I did not do.
:-( Dammit. Anyway, apologies all round, and especially to
Ahang. It is to be hoped that we can continue to work together,
and including Ahmad if possible, but then on the basis of
consultation and trust. It would be silly to have two competing
versions of the list, especially when there are so many other
projects needing attention - lists of the tablets and published
works in the original of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Bab, for instance.
But if Ahang reacts by refusing to share his work further I will
certainly understand - he is undoubtedly the person best qualified
to coordinate such a list and I was only hoping that, by taking on
the translations part of the work, I could help the work along.
Sorry Ahang: more material for the self-recrimination file
Talismanians, please a little patience while we work this out in
good order, and for my part, if I remain involved, I promise to
see that the results are posted on Talisman as often as there are
significant updates to make, and the list is put in good order.
Your contributions and corrections are vital.
Sen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen McGlinn ph: 31-43-3216854
Andre Severinweg 47 email: Sen.McGlinn@RL.RuLimburg.NL
6214 PL Maastricht, the Netherlands
***
When, however, thou dost contemplate the innermost essence of things,
and the individuality of each,
thou wilt behold the signs of thy Lord's mercy . . ."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From A.Aniss@unsw.EDU.AUWed Mar 27 11:03:40 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 23:52:22 +1000 (EST)
From: Ahmad Aniss
To: Sen.Mcglinn@rl.rulimburg.nl
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Tablets list
Dear Sen,
Dear Talismanins,
I have to say sorry to Sen regarding to sending an updated
list of Tablets without sending it to him and Ahang.
This is because when I received his and Ahang's list
I did not look at the headings and I thought it was sent
to Talisman, so I thought that it was made puplic. In any
way I think it is OK to be open to our friends at Talisman
perhaps someone finds an important point to mention in this
regard. Also, I like to bring to attention of Sen and Ahang
that I did conferm their contribution which I think is much
more than mine to this list. So once again I like to
acknowledge their contribution and hard work on this regard
My purpose to send the list again to Talisman and NUR was to
let other have a share of the results. I still think it is
OK to send revised lists to Talisman to show to other the
progress and request help on the list.
With warm regards,
Ahmad.
_______________________________________________________________________
^ ^
^ Dr. A.M. Aniss, Tel: Home [61(2)] 505 509 ^
^ Bio-Medical Engineer, Work [61(2)] 694 5915 ^
^ Neuropsychiatric Institute, Mobile 019 992020 ^
^ Prince Henry Hospital, Fax: Work [61(2)] 694 5747 ^
^ Little Bay, N.S.W. 2036, ^
^ Australia. Email: A.Aniss@unsw.edu.au ^
^_______________________________________________________________________^
From DAWNLIQU@fllab.chass.ncsu.eduWed Mar 27 11:03:58 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:07:40 EST
From: QUANTA DAWNLIGHT
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: A letter to God!
Dear God, Allah and the Possessor of All Names!
There is no need to tell you about my life's experiences for you to
understand where I am coming from with this letter. But, there is a
need for me to know what all that means. I'm sorry I had to go
through talisman to communicate. As you also know lately I am kind of
not in the mood of just reading words. You can say that I am ignorant.
And I don't understand how all that is gonna help me. Sometimes, I
say He knows what I need to grow, so why He makes me say the same
Words over and over again. Can I not just talk from my heart? Here it
is. BTW, I feel really close to you, even though I being lazy.
I was born with this innate knowledge that there is something very
very special being a human. I also wish I was born from that very
special love between a man and a woman. The kind of love that makes
your tummy squeazy when you see that fellow. You blush, you wanna
hide your feelings so, you dare not looking at his face. Now,
God! why did you make my poor mommy be forced to marry someone whom
she did not care about? Then, here I came along. What am I to do?
Then, is this other special love from a mother to a child. It is
indescribable. to hold this precious, marvelous being whom you love.
Now, I know my mother loved me. But, I always wondered if she would
have loved me more, if she loved him too. Why you let this happen?
You decreed that a man loves a woman and she loves his child.
Then, you send men whom you chose to be your Teachers of humanity.
They wrote things like "men were superior to women" or as some folk
on talisman are talking about, it appears that you even said men can
beat women when they are not obedient. Now, my question to you Dear
God, is this. What should women be doing with men who are not doing
what you asked them doing? I'll tell you the truth, I personally
want to beat the heck out of them, one by one! Is that okay too???
If it is not okay, then why did you give me those feelings? I mean
I really would love to put some in public square and whipp 'em up.
I think it just ain't fair the way things are. So, let me know
what you thinking about this one. I sure the heck don't wanna ask
them other men on talisman. What do they know anyway!! I decided
to go to the Highest Authority! Thank you for your time and kind
replies my Dearest God of the Universe! If I get any inspiration
is it okay to share with them folk on talisman? They'll burn me??
love
q.
**************************************************************************
A mechanism of world inter-communication will be devised, embracing the whole
planet, freed from national hinderances and restrictions, and functioning
with marvellous swiftness and perfect regularity.-Shoghi Effendi, 1936
From belove@sover.netWed Mar 27 11:11:25 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 08:34:03 PST
From: belove@sover.net
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: dogs in heaven, women on UHJ
Last night on the Bill Moyers special, Houston Smith told the story of his zen training. The Koan he was given was the story of a man who asked a saint whether dogs had a buddha nature. The saint said no. But the Buddha had said even grass had buddha nature. He had to wrestle with this contradiction until he was felled by it, exhausted and enlightnement came. Enlightenment was something along the lines of, "If you are true to your own buddha nature, this isn't a meaningful dilemma."
So I wondered whether this koan had bearing on two recent Talisman threads, are there dogs in heaven, why are their no women on UHJ.
Philip
From Alethinos@aol.comWed Mar 27 11:11:41 1996
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:50:43 -0500
From: Alethinos@aol.com
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: (fwd) Re: The UHJ, Men, & Secret Socieities
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 08:37:02 CST
Resent-From: Milissa Boyer
Resent-To: talisman@indiana.edu
Dear Mr Harrison--
Now that you have finished pontificating, would you please answer the
question?
I obviously took Baha'u'llah's statement below at face value and interpreted it
literally. Obviously this was wrong.
Still waiting for your answer!!!---mab
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Dear Mr Harrison--
>When Baha'u'llah said that "Today women are accounted as men (rijal)"
>what do you think He meant?
>Sincerely,
>Milissa Boyer
>mboyer@ukans.edu
The question is Ms. Boyer, what do you think He meant? Did He clearly state
that women would be members of the Universal House of Justice? Shall we play
the inference game as some would have us do? And to what end?
Would it really rock the world if tomorrow the Universal House of Justice
said that women could now serve on the House? Would the cover of Newsweek
proclaim NOW THE WAY IS CLEAR FOR TENS OF MILLIONS TO JOIN THE BAHA'I FAITH!
What great boon would descend upon the world if this were to occur? Would it
add something to the revelation of God?
It is not that this isn't a tough nut to swallow for a lot of us. It is that,
for the time being it has been answered. This has been pushed to the wall, so
to speak, and there is no room left. At least not now. So let's drop it and
move on to more critical matters. The future will tell.
Or are we going to have a Faith where our *faith* is tested each time we are
faced with something that stands opposed to our preconcieved notions of what
ought to be? Where we can't let something go for the time being because our
ego world-view is precariously dangling on the edge and can't bear the view
of Reality that confronts it; the Reality that says that not all of our
treasured notions will hold the Field today?
America is becoming a one-trick-pony show; and it would seem that the Faith
in America is too. Soon we will each have our own personal litmus test for
the validity of the Cause of God and it will all boil down to this: does it
suit ME.
jim harrison
Alethinos@aol.com
From jrcole@umich.eduWed Mar 27 11:23:49 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:12:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: The UnChristian Koran (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:24:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Juan R Cole
To: belove@sover.net
Subject: Re: The UnChristian Koran
Philip:
The word translated "friend" in that verse is "wali," which also means
"guardian," and is a legal relationship in ancient Arabia. The verse is
saying the Muslims shouldn't make themselves beholden to Christians and
Jews by accepting political patronage from them, at a time when the
nascent Muslim community was under siege on all sides.
cheers Juan
From Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.comWed Mar 27 18:02:31 1996
Date: 27 Mar 1996 10:59:55 GMT
From: "Don R. Calkins"
To: iskandar@ns.moran.com
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: Re: beating women...
> I agree with you 100% that this is an "indefensible teaching". I don't =
> give
> a sweet damn about the time, place or cultural context
Iskandar -
I will disagree with you a bit on this. It was my understanding that this
was, in fact, a serious limit on the punishment of a wayward woman, the the
summary imposition of a death sentence was thereby eliminated. Therefore, the
status of women was significantly raised in Arabia by this and several other
statements in the Qu'ran. A similar attitude existed in the U.S. during the
1800's. With the teaching of Shaykh Ahmad, a new process of raising
consciousness was initiated which will not be fully realized until the Golden
Age. I think we must be careful about making value judgments of these
peoples actions based on our late 20th Century awareness. In like manner, I
suspect the people of the late Golden Age will wonder what took us so long to
practice the standards they will find obvious.
Don C
He who believes himself spiritual proves he is not - The Cloud of Unknowing
From Don_R._Calkins@commonlink.comWed Mar 27 18:02:45 1996
Date: 27 Mar 1996 10:59:31 GMT
From: "Don R. Calkins"
To: belove@sover.net
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: dogs in heaven, women on UHJ
Philip -
Thank you much for that story. I've been trying to make this point in a
logical discursive way for several years, including once or twice on talisman
the last 9 months, and have doubted whether I got my point across.
Don C

He who believes himself spiritual proves he is not - The Cloud of Unknowing
From burlb@bmi.netWed Mar 27 18:03:37 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 09:41 PST
From: Burl Barer
To: M
Cc: talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Re: beating women...
Gordy said:
so I do not dispute or belittle her views, nor would I attempt to defend
that hideous verse from the Koran. I agree with you 100% that this is an
"indefensible teaching". I don't give
>a sweet damn about the time, place or cultural context; if this
translation is even close to accurate this verse is not "of God".
***
I am a bit stunned.
A verse from the Holy Koran portrayed as "hideous,"
an authenticated admonition from a Divine Messenger termed "indefensible,"
and a charge of corrupting the Sacred Texts all in one hyper-reactionary
paragraph.
Why should women be exempt from corporeal punishment? Why should they be
allowed to get away with scheming, plotting, and doing evil just because
their reproductive organs are in the inside instead of outside?
Gordy says:
> I am painfully aware of the disproportionate amount of violence against
women....
Burl says:
I am painfully aware of the disproportionate amount of violence against
men in the world. *why* is it OK to hurt males?! Why is it OK to beat us,
kill us, legislate our killing of other men, and it is *accepted* as normal
and then...then...then... and then get all upset because in 622 a.d. there
were, according to God, situations in which a woman could be physically
disciplined.
------
"I've only smashed a woman in the jaw once, but she deserved it. She's dead
now. I never knew her name, but I do recall slugging her. The fact that
she had breasts and/or ovaries was not taken into consideration at the
moment I decided to plant my fist in her face.
So, call me a woman beater.
but I'll tell ya this:
when her head snapped back from the impact,
she dropped the knife."
----------------------
bb
>
>
*************************************
MAN OVERBOARD by Burl Barer is still only $19.95 and may be ordered from any
bookstore. ISBN#: 1-56901-815-4 Buy Yours Today!
********************
From L. Wed Mar 27 18:04:39 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 18:56:53 +0100 (MET)
From: L.
To: Talisman@indiana.edu
Subject: Homosexual "identity"
I have been reading through some reprints I acquired last summer. One is
"Sexuality as the Mainstay of Identity: Psychoanalytic Perspectives" by
Ethel Spector Person (*Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society*
1980, vol. 5, no. 4: 605-630). In it she states:
"In some homosexual male patients who enter treatment in order to change
their sexual orientation, it has been reported that the effective obstacle
to change is not the inability to have intercourse with women, nor the
preference for sex with men, but the unwillingness to give up a homosexual
'identity.'" (p. 621)
I would be interested in comments on this statement, but I would suggest
that, preferably, they come from people who might have the opportunity to
read the entire essay so Person's theory is not taken out of context.
Unfortunately she did not cite the studies (or whatever) that she based this
statement on.
Sincerely,
L.
From rabbana@a1.bmoa.umc.dupont.comWed Mar 27 18:05:23 1996
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 11:29:01 -0500
From: Ahang Rabbani